Pathways to culture changeLessons from the Catalyst Seed Fund programmeInterim report: May 2017

www.publicengagement.ac.uk

2

Established in 2015, the Catalyst Seed Fund (CSF) programme saw RCUK building on the momentum generated from

the Beacons for Public Engagement and the Catalyst projects to support a new cohort of HEIs: the Catalyst Seed Funds.

The CSFs were initially funded by RCUK for a year-long project, supported by the NCCPE, to embed a culture of public

engagement with research into their institutions. Each Higher Education Institution (HEI) received funds of £65,000. Following

satisfactory assessment of their business plans, funding was then confirmed for a further 12 month period from August 2016.

Based around the UK, the 10 projects are:

University of Birmingham

The University of Cambridge

University of Glasgow

Imperial College London

King’s College London

University of Leeds

University of Liverpool

University of Oxford

University of Southampton

University of Warwick

A pen portrait of each project can be found on the NCCPE’s website:

www.publicengagement.ac.uk/work-with-us/current-projects/catalyst-seed-fund

Appendix one provides a brief overview of each of the projects.

This document shares the journeys of the Catalyst Seed Fund (CSF) projects, and the lessons they have learned about how to

plan effective interventions to improve the quality of support for Public Engagement with Research (PER), although many of the

lessons are applicable to embedding other forms of public engagement (PE). It breaks their journeys down into four phases

which provide a useful framework for you to plan your own culture change journey. For each phase, we provide:

An ‘in a nutshell; summary of the section

Examples of what the CSFs tried; what worked; what they found challenging; and what they learned

Links to a variety of resources created by the CSFs and by the NCCPE which you may find useful

Aimed at those wanting to develop more effective support for public engagement within their institution, this document

provides lots of food for thought, as well as ideas for quick wins to get you started.

The table below outlines the content you will find it the report, in order to direct you to the things that are relevant to your

specific context.

Assess your current situation p.4

An effective culture change programme needs to be sensitive to its context. Understanding the particular history, culture and

ethos in your institution, and the ‘drivers’ and likely barriers, is crucial.

This section offers some prompts to help you see your own institution in context. It invites you to reflect on:

the scale and scope of research activity and income in your institution

the existing provision for PE

the likely drivers and possible obstacles that you might face, given the timing of your plans and the resources

available

3

Clarify your goals, priorities and rationale p.8

An effective culture change programme is focused and doesn’t try to change everything at once.

It identifies priorities, sensitive to the institutional context. It makes the rationale and assumptions that underpin these

priorities explicit addressing key questions such as: Why these? How will tackling these make a difference? What will success

look like?

In working out where to focus your efforts, it helps to balance strengths and weaknesses: you should go with the grain of your

institution, and capitalise on where there is positive energy. It is also important that your efforts are focused on areas where

there is distinct room for improvement.

Plot, hold and review your course p. 11

Planning and delivering a coherent culture change programme takes considerable skill. There are a set of tried and tested

‘triggers’ which can really help you to focus your efforts. These triggers are:

Secure high level commitment and alignment

Review and take stock; consolidate existing activity

Develop your rationale, narrative and strategy; consider sustainability

Identify and address quick wins and tractable challenges

Identify success measures and monitor

Put in place steps to sustain momentum beyond project

Work responsively; build allies and networks

Recruit a skilled team, with expertise in facilitating change

These activities are not linear: typically the CSFs revisited them throughout their projects. Together, they provided the

foundations on which they built their success.

Reflect on the journey P.59

Culture change is a complex, unpredictable process. You should be ensuring that feedback and reflection are animating your

work, at every stage of the journey.

This report ends with some final reflections from the project teams.

Appendix 1: An overview of the each of the ten CSF projects, with links to their project pages P. 61

The bulk of this report is dedicated to the third phase: ‘Plot, hold and review your course’. We describe in some detail a variety

of practical mechanisms that the CSF projects invested in, and the lessons they learned along the way. We also provide links to

some of the resources and tools they have created.

The NCCPE have several other resources that you will find helpful in planning your approach, including:

The EDGE tool – a self-assessment framework which highlights 3 main areas that need to be addressed in developing

effective support for engagement, and 9 focal points for development

Learning from the Catalysts – a report highlighting learning from the 8 Catalyst projects, with recommendations for action

If you have any questions or comments on the report do please get in touch. The NCCPE’s role is to support universities across

the UK to embed support for PE. We would love to help if we can. nccpe.enquiries@uwe.ac.uk

4

In a nutshell

An effective culture change programme needs to be sensitive to its context. Understanding the particular history, culture and

ethos in your institution, and the ‘drivers’ and likely barriers, is crucial.

This section offers some prompts to help you see your own institution in context. It invites you to reflect on:

the scale and scope of research activity and income in your institution

the existing provision for PE

the likely drivers and possible obstacles that you might face, given the timing of your plans and the resources available

Before starting to plan a culture change programme, it really helps to step back and take stock of your situation. Each university

– and each faculty or department within that university – will have distinctive ways of making sense of PE.

One critical dimension concerns your research income and staff and student numbers. Here is a snapshot from across the CSF

project.

Research income Academic staff numbers Professional services

numbers

Postgraduate

numbers

University of

Birmingham

£130.5m 3116

4018

(1601 on academic-

related contracts)

11, 381

(2770 PGRs)

University of

Cambridge

£500m 1500 academic staff

4000 contracted

researchers

1000 7,000

University of

Southampton

£124m (2014/15) 3100

3300 7,000

University of Liverpool

£ 102 M 2031 3108 4,705

The character of the research portfolio at the institution will be significant, as will (for instance) the existence or not of a

doctoral school. Whether you are a campus university or not – and whether you operate on a single or multiple sites may affect

the opportunities you can provide for PE.

The history of PE at your institution is also significant:

Do you already have an established PE team?

Do you have a history of running events and festivals with a PE element?

Does your doctoral training programme run PE activities?

Are there formal structures set up to support PE?

These four snapshots from the CSF projects describe their situation before their projects began.

King’s College London

A centralised PE department was closed down in 2014. Since then, the university has moved towards a model of ‘professional

networks’ which connect multiple departmental or faculty-level support staff, distributing the responsibility for core services

across the university. This model is still being trialled, with only a few networks firmly established. There are approximately

5

five departmental or faculty-level staff members with ‘PE’ or ‘outreach’ in their job titles. However, a professional network to

coordinate these staff members has not yet been initiated or established.

Since the closure of the PE department, King’s has been investing in several alternative and innovative initiatives to enhance

the porosity of the University - bringing the public into King’s, and taking King’s research staff out into the community. One

example is the Cultural Institute at King’s which connects the university with practitioners, producers, policy makers and

participants across the arts and culture, in London and beyond, creating space where conventions are challenged and original

perspectives emerge.

University of Birmingham (UoB)

UoB is predominantly a single-site campus, with a small number of satellite sites such as The Shakespeare Institute (Stratford-

Upon-Avon) and the Dental School (within Birmingham Dental Hospital). It is composed of five colleges: Medical and Dental

Sciences (MDS), Engineering and Physical Sciences (EPS), Life and Environmental Sciences (LES), Social Sciences (CoSS) and

Arts and Law (CAL). There is therefore a broad portfolio of research strengths (evidenced by REF2014 returns and grant

income) ranging from Science (including medicine), Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) through to Arts,

Humanities and Social Sciences (AHSS).

In 2012, Alice Roberts (clinical anatomist, author and TV broadcaster) was appointed as UoB’s first Professor of PE in Science,

and the PE Working Group (PEWG) was established. This informal group was co-chaired by Professor Roberts and Professor

Ian Grosvenor (then Deputy PVC Culture) with voluntary membership across a mix of academic and Professional Services staff

with a history of participating in/supporting PER. With the exception of Professor Roberts (FTE 0.5), no members had PER as a

core responsibility within their roles and there was no senior management responsibility for PER within the institution. While

PER was briefly referenced in our previous Strategic Framework (2010-15), and UoB was an early signatory of Manifesto for

Engaging the Public with Research, there was no institutionally-approved PER strategy or reporting mechanism.

University of Southampton

University funding (HEIF) supported an informal PE team and a steering group from April 2014. Prior to that all co-ordination

effort was led by motivated staff in addition to their main academic or professional service roles. Many staff across the HEI

were involved with PE projects, often of very high quality. For example, Southampton had one category winner and two

category finalist in the NCCPE’s Engage Competition 2014. Typically projects operated in one research area/service with

limited opportunities for sustainability beyond grant lifetimes. British Science Week marked a rare annual peak of co-

ordinated PE with a range of platforms available and connecting to a diverse regional audience. Until the creation of the

Engaged University Steering Group there were no formal structures to support PE, although a notable success of the informal

effort was the inclusion of PE in promotion criteria as part of a wider Academic Reward and Recognition review.

University of Liverpool

Despite the absence of a formal PE strategy, a significant amount of PER activity was underway. In the 2014-15 academic

year, the University engaged over 200,000 members of the public in person, and approximately 7 million people worldwide

via digital media. Historically, individual schools and departments tended to conduct their PER in isolation, resulting in an

atomised spread of activities across the University. In recent years, there has been a partial shift towards a more co-ordinated

approach within individual faculties. Since the start of the CSF project, the beginnings of a collaborative approach across the

whole University has emerged. The movement towards a more joined up approach has been driven by a number of factors:

The introduction of impact, as a strand within the formal assessment of research output from HEI and research institutes.

In particular, the REF exercise, and pathways to impact requirements within research grant proposals.

The recognition of PER as a pathway to enhanced research outputs – the appreciation that not all knowledge can be

created in isolation, in individual academic units, without external engagement.

The mandate for the University to fulfil its civic duties has grown significantly in recent years. In particular for the

widening participation segment, the institution’s formal commitment has increased significantly since 2012. A more

joined-up approach has allowed for efficiency of scale, and for a more diverse offer of activities.

6

The University has invested heavily in infrastructure and facilities projects over the course of the last five years. These

projects were designed to facilitate knowledge exchange and engagement activities – especially academic outreach

activities engaging with young people.

The increasingly recognised value of activities like schools outreach for young people in the community, as well as the

benefits for the institution, its staff and students.

The significantly increased level of competitiveness of undergraduate student recruitment across the UK HE landscape,

since the introduction of £9,000 fees in 2012.

The established, yet still growing reputation of the University as a centre for knowledge exchange among regional bodies,

including museums and galleries, cultural centres, schools and community groups.

All of the CSF projects reflected that timing was a significant factor in their ability to deliver results: for some, their progress was

significantly accelerated because the ‘stars aligned’ and they could benefit from other developments happening across their

institution. Others were frustrated by events. It is important to take account of this. Some key questions include:

Are there any changes to institutional structures – such as re-organisations of faculties and departments – that might

affect your project?

Are there imminent changes to senior staff associated with PE?

University of Birmingham

Our culture change journey has commenced amidst an opportune backdrop of institutional level work on Engagement

(broadly conceived), spearheaded by work on our 2020 Strategic Framework. The CSF and RCUK’s continued commitment to

the PER has enabled us to make the case for PER to be identified as a specific strand of activity within the proposal under

development.

University of Warwick

There was change at the top of the organisation with a new Vice-Chancellor and related adjustments to the PVC team within

which engagement features in the remit of two PVCs. This brought a fresh approach to local community, cities and regional

engagement whilst maintaining momentum in international activities.

University of Oxford

The Catalyst Seed Fund (CSF) came at a very opportune time for Oxford, with the recent appointments of two University

‘firsts’ in 2015: the Academic Champion for PE with Research and the Senior Facilitator and Coordinator, PE with Research,

Research Services. The CSF grant added significant and demonstrable value to our programme of activity, enabling Oxford to

take significant steps towards fostering a climate in which PER can flourish than would have been possible with the two new

appointments alone.

A particularly useful tool which all of the CSF projects drew on to inform their bids is the NCCPE EDGE tool1. This was created by

the NCCPE as part of the Beacons for PE programme (2008 – 2012) which pioneered new approaches to galvanising long term

culture change. The EDGE tool identifies a range of areas which have proved to be crucially important in securing culture change.

It provides a set of prompts to allow you to weigh up where you currently stand and to identify where to focus future effort.

It identifies three key areas to think about – purpose, process and people – and a set of indicators to allow you to take stock of

your activity in each of these. As they prepared their bids all of the CSF projects used the EDGE tool to take stock of their relative

1 https://www.publicengagement.ac.uk/support-it/self-assess-with-edge-tool

7

strengths and areas of weakness. Using the EDGE collaboratively also helped the teams achieve buy in from across the

university.

University of Oxford

The EDGE analysis was a really useful tool to explore Oxford’s key strengths and weaknesses in our PER support and where

best to channel our energies. It saved a huge amount of resources: it is a great tool that is evidence-based on results from

previous HEIs. Facilitating EDGE analyses for the key ‘parts’ of the University helped create a sense of ownership in those that

took part for what they needed to do to help embed a PER culture for their ‘area’.

University of Cambridge

Our approach has been guided by an EDGE tool self-assessment of our performance which highlighted the dimensions of

“Recognition and “People” as needing particular attention. Through our CSF we have launched a number of interventions

designed to improve these areas, whilst developing a more coherent strategic approach to PER across the University.

University of Birmingham

We analysed our institutional PER position and identified four priority areas for further review and development during the

course of this award: PLANNING (our ‘Mission’); PEOPLE (our ‘Leadership’); PARTNERSHIPS (our ‘Public’); and PROMOTION

(our ‘Recognition’).

We return to the EDGE tool in section 3, ‘Plot, hold and review your course’.

Useful resources

You can download the EDGE tool from the NCCPE website: https://www.publicengagement.ac.uk/support-it/self-assess-with-

edge-tool

You can also access an interactive version of the EDGE tool and submit your results to the NCCPE:

https://www.publicengagement.ac.uk/support-it/self-assessment/edge-tool

8

In a nutshell

An effective culture change programme is focused and doesn’t try to change everything all at once.

It identifies priorities, sensitive to the institutional context. It makes the rationale and assumptions that underpin these

priorities explicit addressing key questions such as: Why these? How will tackling these make a difference? What will success

look like?

In working out where to focus your efforts, it helps to balance strengths and weaknesses: you should go with the grain of the

institution, and capitalise on where there is positive energy. It is also important that your efforts are focused on areas where

there is distinct room for improvement.

Having taken stock broadly of your situation, it is vital to begin to establish priorities and a distinctive focus for your project. As

well as utilising techniques like SWOT analysis, the CSFs all used their EDGE tool assessments to help them work out how to

prioritise their efforts.

University of Glasgow

During the reflective period of bid preparation it was decided to target our efforts in three strategic areas:

1. Improve strategic focus and high level support: To embed ‘leadership’ at the head of our academic structures with the

creation of a new academic lead for PE, active involvement from the Vice Principal and a strong voice created by a

Strategy Group.

2. Raise reward and recognition for engaged researchers: To ‘inspire’ staff and students about the purpose, value and

meaning of PE; through showcasing creative PE projects, celebrating role models, and raising awareness of the personal

and professional rewards to be gained through involvement in PE.

3. Improve understanding of and grow capacity for PE: To ‘develop’ staff and students ability for high quality PE through a

series of planned initiatives. To give staff and students the best quality resources and training and increase the quantity

and visibility of the support offered.

University of Oxford

We have decided to focus on enabling excellence, rather than aiming to simply increase the volume of PER activity. And by

excellence, we mean PE activity that either increases the quality or impact of the research; is tightly focussed on a specific

research activity/ project; incorporates innovation where possible; has clearly defined objectives and target demographics;

utilises the appropriate methodology; and benefits both parties (i.e. the researchers and the participating public).

University of Birmingham

Working within the wider context of distinct but complementary types of institutional “Engagement” activities, we will

support the delivery of the PER Strategy through a focus on i) Support, ii) Reward & Recognition for PER, and iii)

Interdisciplinary PER.

There will be a particular emphasis on sustainability and our overarching aim is to take a “whole life approach” (Postgraduate

to Professor), by working with our Leading to Engage cohort and College Directors of Research to understand and respond to

the needs of researchers at all stages of their careers.

9

Having a clear rationale for your approach helps you to communicate your purpose to others. Making your assumptions explicit

also allows helps you to monitor and reflect on your progress as you deliver the project.

King’s College London

King's identified two core objectives for their project, and articulated a clear rationale for both:

CSF OBJECTIVE 1: Support researchers to embed high quality PE strategies into their grant application via the pathways to

impact statement by establishing engagement services.

Rationale:

• Researchers undergo a guided learning process embedded within research practice, which has long lasting impact on

their approach to PE.

• The level and nature of support can be tailored to each individual so that all researchers can be supported in developing

their engagement practice further, taking into account their past experience and personal goals.

• Introducing PE as something that can enhance the quality of research (and research proposals) makes its value clear to

both researchers and the university.

CSF OBJECTIVE 2: Work with the Science Gallery London programming team and other departments to produce a set of

recommendations, activities and plans that will scale up across the university in future years.

Rationale:

• Based on the learnings from the Beacons for PE, it would not be possible for one PE Manager to instigate a culture

change across an institution of this size in one year, without taking advantage of previously established networks and

opportunities to maximise reach and impact.

• By working in partnership with teams across the university, it is possible to build a shared narrative for PE at King’s.

• Interdisciplinarity was becoming a key priority within King’s new vision and strategy, therefore being able to demonstrate

the collaborative nature of engagement by partnering with teams across the university will help to secure senior by-in.

The approaches developed at Leeds and Liverpool were built on a clear understanding of their strengths:

University of Leeds

The project started from a position of strength:

• Despite a lack of formal support for PE there is a history of running events and festivals with a PE element and working in

collaboration with non-academic partners. The university delivers and has delivered a significant volume of PE activity.

• Individuals are highly motivated and enthusiastic about PER and have come together to network since 2013, starting as a

grass-root movement; the associated email list has more than 240 subscribers.

• The people who championed the PE agenda at Leeds in the three years before the CSF wrote the business case for the

RCUK CSF and are in post to deliver the project. They have strong ownership of the project and are respected within the

PE grass-root movement.

• In the run up to the RCUK CSF application our VC signed the Manifesto for PE in May 2015

University of Liverpool

10

Happily, there is a vibrant and active community of engaged researchers, and a programme of engaged research at the

University. There is great interest in PER, and appreciation of its importance and value; many of our researchers already have

established a working practice of engaging wholeheartedly with the public, even before the advent of the CSF, when

University adopted a formal, strategic approach.

Cambridge chose to focus on a specific area of opportunity: the lack of senior academic oversight of PER.

University of Cambridge

[Our initial review] identified the lack of an overarching senior-level strategic framework at the University to guide PE

provision and embed it alongside research and impact agendas. This responds to RCUKs CSF aim to “create a culture within

the HEI where excellent PE with research is better embedded…and integrated within policies, practices and procedures”. As

such, strengthening senior academic oversight of PER has been the backbone for the work of our CSF.

At this early stage it is really important to be able to describe what success will look like: to have a compelling ‘vision’ of what

you hope to achieve.

University of Oxford

At the University of Oxford we believe that PE enriches research and society and are committed to enabling our researchers

to inspire, consult and collaborate with the public. Our vision is to embed high-quality and innovative PE as an integral part of

research culture and practice at Oxford, enhancing our position as a world-leading research institution.

Useful resources

The CSF projects benefited from the experiences of the Beacons for PE (2008-12) and Catalysts for PE with Research (2012 –

2015).

Learning from the Beacon projects is captured on the NCCPE website in our ‘Planning for Change’ section:

www.publicengagement.ac.uk/support-it

You can access the final Beacon project reports here: www.publicengagement.ac.uk/work-with-us/completed-

projects/beacons

The NCCPE also worked closely with the Catalyst teams in 2015 to distil the key lessons learned over the three years of their

projects. You can access a summary report here:

https://www.publicengagement.ac.uk/sites/default/files/publication/nccpe_catalyst_report_may_2016.pdf

The Catalyst team’s final reports, and a synthesis of these, can be accessed here: www.publicengagement.ac.uk/work-with-

us/completed-projects/catalysts-project

11

In a nutshell

Planning and delivering a coherent culture change programme takes considerable skill. There are a set of tried and tested

‘triggers’ which can really help you to focus your efforts. These triggers are:

Secure high level commitment and alignment

Review and take stock; consolidate existing activity

Develop rationale, narrative and strategy; consider sustainability

Identify and address quick wins and tractable challenges

Identify success measures and monitor

Put in place steps to sustain momentum beyond project

Work responsively; build allies and networks

Recruit a skilled team, with expertise in facilitating change

These activities are not linear: typically projects revisited them throughout their projects. Together, they provided the

foundations on which they built their success.

This section covers in depth the various mechanisms that the CSF projects invested in to deliver their projects.

In the previous two sections we illustrated how the CSF projects went about defining the ambition, rationale and focus of their

projects. This preparatory work was vital in enabling them to write convincing business cases for their projects. Once they had

secured the funding they turned their attention to delivering a coherent and focused culture change programme. We’ve

outlined below what these programmes typically consist of.

We have identified eight triggers which underpinned what they did. Some of these involved revisiting what they had already

explored in preparing their bids – for instance, taking stock of the current culture and support for PE, but in greater depth and

detail, and involving a lot more people in that conversation. All of the steps align meaningfully with the three focal points of the

EDGE tool: they are concrete ways in which you can begin to make progress on the purpose, processes and people dimensions

of the tool. In plotting your own culture change journey, you will find many useful tips and tricks which the CSFs deployed: in this

section, we have provided a snapshot of their work and links to helpful resources in each of the eight areas.

12

Eight Triggers of Change

Purpose: Building a sense of common purpose and securing high level support is vital. Taking the time to consult widely and

to make sense of how colleagues understand and value engagement is crucial. From this a compelling rationale and narrative

should begin to emerge to motivate your project. From the beginning, it is important to consider ‘what next?’ How will the

work lead to lasting change?

Trigger 1: Secure high level

commitment and alignment

Trigger 2: Review and take stock; map

and consolidate existing activity;

locate yourself

Trigger 3: Develop your rationale,

narrative and strategy; consider

sustainability

• Align projects with wider

institutional strategy

• Secure senior leaders as champions

• Make business-like connections to

other sources of funding

• Revisit the EDGE tool

• Gather data and insight using

surveys etc

• Choose your location with care

• Clarify your definition of PE, and

your scope

• Develop a compelling narrative and

rationale

• Develop a strategy and action plan

• Establish effective governance

arrangements

Process: It is vital to get started and try some things: all of the CSF’s quickly began to deliver interventions like training and

awards etc. They all sought to define the outcomes they hoped these activities would realise – and put in place monitoring

and evaluation. All of them were focused on life beyond the funded project – and on securing a long term future for the work.

Trigger 4: Identify and address quick

wins and tractable challenges

Trigger 5: Identify success measures

and monitor

Trigger 6: Put in place steps to sustain

momentum beyond project

• Offer training

• Offer opportunities to engage

• Create a seed fund

• Develop an awards scheme

• Invest in web resources / tools

• Raise the visibility of your work

• Offer a service linked to grant

funding

• Develop a logic model collectively,

and use to inform your approach

and your evaluation

• Invest in evaluation expertise

• Secure ongoing funding

• Embed activity in wider systems

and services

People: All of the projects tried to put ‘people first’: they knew that their success would depend upon this. The skills and

resilience of their core project team were vital in securing their success.

Trigger 7: Work responsively; build

allies and networks

Trigger 8: Recruit a skilled team, with

expertise in facilitating change

• Consult and work responsively

• Build networks

• Recruit the right kinds of expertise

to your team (e.g. expertise in

evaluation)

13

In a nutshell

Putting a bid together (to secure internal or external investment in culture change) requires strong senior support.

Getting a small investment to ‘punch above its weight’ also requires the activity to align with a broader movement for change

in the host institution, and with wider strategic objectives, programmes and funding streams.

The CSF projects typically sought to:

Align their projects with wider institutional strategy development

Reflect their institution’s distinctive ethos and approach to engaging with society’ in the framing of their work

Secure senior leaders as champions, to capitalise on their political and professional authority

Make business-like connections to other sources of funding, including research impact

All of the projects sought to establish links with wider corporate strategy – finding ‘hooks’ to demonstrate how PE contributes to

the host university’s wider objectives. Aligning your PE narrative with your institution’s broader ‘public’ role is crucial. It allows

you to articulate how your work will contribute to the institution’s wider goals, and to capitalise on the motivation of staff and

students.

University of Cambridge

The University of Cambridge recognises the importance of supporting PE with academic research, and aligns it with the

institution’s central mission to “contribute to society through the pursuit of education, learning, and research at the highest

international levels of excellence”.

University of Liverpool

While the University community understands PER as an integrated part of research, it also largely values and embraces civic

engagement; the idea that the University and its people can be a force for good. This has been revealed to be a strong guiding

principle for a lot of academics – there is an appetite for more.

In realising this alignment, you need to consider timing. Some projects kicked off after a new corporate strategy had recently

been launched, and so sought to embed PE in how that strategy was operationalised. Others sought to influence the shape of

new strategic frameworks. In such negotiations, it is important to ensure that the distinctive dynamics of high quality public

engagement are foregrounded: an emphasis on listening and conversation, to generate mutual benefit. High quality

engagement should seek to influence the work of the university as well as to contribute to meaningful impacts in society.

King’s College London

King’s has been committed to serving society since its foundation in 1829. In the second year of CSF funding, in January 2017,

King’s new strategic vision 2029 was launched. PE forms a part of this new strategy as one of five top priorities–

specifically, priority number three ‘Serve to shape and transform’. King’s has identified five key steps to work

towards in order to achieve this priority. Step three explicitly relates to PE; ‘Make a tangible difference to the

wellbeing, health, culture, security and prosperity of the local and international communities with which we

engage.’ The inclusion of engagement in King’s new strategy and vision represents a very positive step forward in

our work to embed a culture where engagement is valued.

14

University of Warwick

The University Strategy, currently being developed, includes engagement in many areas of its focus. [….]. Warwick’s focus on

regional and local areas has benefitted engagement activities close to the Campus. This reflects how a local ‘research

intensive’ university seeks to be relevant to its local population and environment.

The CSFs all had PIs who were PVC’s or senior academic staff. The PIs provided much needed support and political nous.

University of Warwick

The CSF Team continues to receive leadership from PI Professor Pam Thomas, PVC for Research (formally People and PE).

Despite her focus on developing the Research Strategy, her interest in PER means it remains is firmly on her agenda. The

project benefits from her extensive practical knowledge, understanding and enthusiasm for PE and her ability to influence

and inform the senior administration.

Imperial College London

The project has been championed by Professor Maggie Dallman, in her role as Associate Provost (Academic Partnerships) and

Chair of the Societal Engagement Group. She is a very experienced and widely respected researcher and this has been

instrumental in gaining traction in this area.

University of Liverpool

The Principal Investigator, a recognised, senior academic, has supported the CSF project in a strong, proactive and visible

way. This has created a clear, positive message endorsing the importance of PER – and has contributed the wider buy-in

around the University.

As well as benefiting from PIs operating at PVC level, several of the CSFs also identified senior academic champions who proved

equally important in raising the status and credibility of their projects:

University of Glasgow

The increase in strategic leadership was welcomed by the University with the remit for a new Dean of PE being drawn up

between the Vice Principal and the Principal. The Dean role quickly took on a function distinct to that of the PE Officer, filling

a vacuum which had not been apparent before the critical reflection of the CSF bid. The increase in senior leadership not only

creates a driving force for the engagement agenda but represents a beacon to researchers, showing that engagement is

valued, important and rewarded.

University of Oxford

As Oxford’s PER focus is to increase the quality or impact of research while benefitting the public participants, it was vital that

it was led by and informed by senior researchers. The importance of the role of Academic Champion at Oxford cannot be

understated, demonstrating that PER is an academic-led pursuit that can increase the quality and impact of research, and not

one purely driven by the needs of the University’s administration.

We would attribute the success of both Oxford’s Champions to having the follow characteristics: a senior highly-respected

academic of international standing; has the respect of senior staff across the University (not just within their Department/

Division); in-depth understanding and real-life experience of PER; the ability to champion across all disciplines – and

understanding of the PER nuances between them; the right balance of a collegiate approach and strong leadership; having

the dedicated support and working together with of a PER academic support staff (in this case the CSF Project Manager).

15

High level commitment doesn’t just need to involve academics and PVCs. It means academic services (finance, communications)

and other units (research impact, doctoral colleges etc.). The CSFs noted the importance of ‘managing upwards’ (e.g. by

arranging regular meetings with the PI); and the value of seeking to get PE written into senior staff’s job descriptions or role

profiles.

Many of the projects sought to align the CSF funding with other institutional funds and ‘pots’ of money, including Wellcome’s

ISSF funding and HEFCE’s HEIF funding. Consolidating these funding streams helped build momentum and to begin to address

the sustainability of the work:

University of Cambridge

A key strength of the CSF continuation period has been increasing alignment with the PE strand of the 5-year Wellcome

Institutional Strategic Support Fund (ISSF). Working in partnership has allowed the University to reinforce the strategic

importance being placed on PER by research funders and build momentum as we enter the final six months of Catalyst Seed

Fund.

University of Leeds

Making use of existing infrastructure and funding is very effective way to boost provision. Aligning with other strategic

investment builds the number of interested stakeholders and builds momentum.

The projects also sought to capitalise on the links between PE and impact

University of Cambridge

A key outcome from the CSF has been the alignment PER with the impact agenda. This work has been consolidated by the

movement of the CSF to the Research Strategy Office and has proved timely, given the release of the Stern review, and the

increased emphasis on societal engagement and PE for the next REF.

Throughout the course of the seed fund period, we have been able to build a body of evidence and work collaboratively to

strengthen the University’s approach to PE as a route to Impact. This includes a thorough analysis of the University of

Cambridge impact case studies submissions to REF 2014. This involved scanning all submissions and categorising them based

on the inclusion of “PE-like” activity. Our results provided a useful tool to leverage conversations about supporting PER in

units where PE was relied upon more, including during the School of Arts and Humanities PER strategy development. The

analysis also allowed us to pinpoint excellent examples, from across high scoring areas, which will now form the basis of a set

of online case studies. Combined with our PE award winners and seed fund holders, we now have a comprehensive set of

stories to convey the strategic importance of PER to academics and senior leadership.

The CSF has also facilitated representation of PE on the new University Pathways to Impact working group. This has allowed

PE to feature alongside impact planning for commercialisation and policy and for shared support tools to be developed. As

well as campaigning for PER to be able to feature as the central component of an impact plan, it has been essential to build

partnerships with impact colleagues so that PER can sit within multi-impact approaches.

University of Warwick

A developing part of the Warwick CSF continues to be the efforts to more deeply embed both PE and Impact into the

research culture across the institution; both aspects are at similar stages in their respective ‘journeys’.

In REF2014, the preference at Warwick was to develop case studies around impacts other than PE. However, with the

enhanced focus on PE afforded by the CSF project, academic colleagues, research development colleagues and the Impact

16

Officers are continuing to explore ways to identify and resource PE activities that can be then integrated into the research

and ensure quality evidence is recorded.

Useful resources

The NCCPE has produced a range of resources exploring the role of PE in the REF. A good place to start is with this summary

review of PE in the REF impact case studies:

https://www.publicengagement.ac.uk/sites/default/files/publication/nccpe_ref_review_executive_summary.pdf

17

In a nutshell

It is vital to build a deeper understanding of your existing culture than a quick EDGE tool assessment can reveal: you need to

immerse yourself in the culture and practice of your institution to gain a profound understanding of how your colleagues

make sense of PE.

All the projects invested time and effort to get out and consult widely – described in the section on network building. Some

invested in significant capture of evidence, through surveys, and sought to exploit wherever possible the institutional

evidence that already existed.

This mapping informed how the teams chose to locate themselves: where might they best be positioned to maximise the

leverage and traction they could achieve? A number of different choices were made, including:

In research management

In external relations

In the VC / executive team

This activity provided a solid platform for the next stage – articulating a distinctive strategy and approach.

Many of the CSFs returned to the EDGE tool to conduct a more systematic baseline for their project.

University of Cambridge

We conducted a more detailed self-assessment of the specific areas we could target to facilitate swifter culture change,

carried out with the NCCPE EDGE tool. Our assessment highlighted room for improvement in the areas of ‘Recognition’ and

some of the ‘People’ dimensions, which were classified as “Developing”. Our focus has therefore been on identifying best

practice in PER, rewarding excellence, and extending opportunities for more researchers to develop their PER activity.

Imperial College London

Our CSF project has focused on the Mission, Leadership, Support, Learning and Recognition themes in the NCCPE’s EDGE

framework. In particular, we have done much to clarify and strengthen institutional awareness and understanding of how PE

can contribute to research.

Others developed a range of survey tools, which focussed on: researcher attitudes and experiences of engagement; or how

supportive the institution was of PE.

University of Southampton

A PE survey was live for respondents until the end of January 2016. Results were broadly in line with those of the Factors

Affecting Public Engagement by UK Researchers survey (for which Southampton was not a respondent), and they inform how

we continue our culture change work. For instance, when asked to identify barriers to participation (from a pre-set list): 30%

of respondents selected ‘no reward/recognition’; and 30% selected ‘insufficient support from more senior staff’. When asked

18

whether more recognition was needed, 92% of respondents stated that it was, with ‘more formal opportunities for

promotion and career progression’ being the most popular means of recognition.

Oxford chose not to develop their own survey but instead to mine existing data (e.g. that collected by the Factors Affecting

Public Engagement by UK Researchers survey).

University of Oxford

We would recommend that any other HEIs think about whether running their own survey is required – given the Factors

Affecting PE results – after careful thought we came to the conclusion that our own survey would likely take considerable

resource but reveal little new data than what was already available.

As part of this orientation process, another vital decision the projects needed to make was where to locate their staff:

University of Glasgow

Glasgow’s Catalyst Seed Fund is being managed from the Research Strategy and Innovation Office (RSIO) with the Principal

Investigator being Prof Jon Cooper, Vice Principal for Innovation and Knowledge Exchange and being project managed by Dr

Jamie Gallagher, PE Officer. The RSIO office also houses the Vice Principal for Research and thus management of the bid is

ideal situated to implement strategic change. The daily management of the CSF is carried out by the PE Officer working with

Simon Earp, Head of Knowledge Exchange. Before implementation proposed interventions are discussed at the regular PE

Strategy Group meetings for input and steering. The PE Strategy Group consists of researchers at different career stages from

each of our four Colleges as well as external engagement partners such as Glasgow Science Centre and Glasgow Life.

Imperial College London

The new CSF-funded role reports directly to Professor Maggie Dallman, Associate Provost (Academic Partnerships) and PI for

the CSF project. The situation of the project within the Provost’s Office ensures that the project has the senior buy-in and a

mandate to work across the College, to drive culture change of engagement with research across the College.

Professor Dallman and the PE Manager, Vicky Brightman, meet bi-weekly to review progress. This is also the avenue through

which to present initiatives and papers for escalation to the Provost Board and/or President for approval, such as the new

President’s Awards for Excellence in Societal Engagement. Vicky Brightman also attends the termly Societal Engagement

Strategy Group. In addition, she meets weekly with Katie Weeks, Research Events Manager and interim CSF Project Manager,

and attends the weekly Research Events Team meetings.

University of Warwick

Working within the newly developed Business and Regional Engagement team the aim is to set up a PE Unit which can begin

to allow more effective PE practice across the University to be supported, sustained and embedded. The new engagement

focus came from the new VC’s direction and seen as part of its integrated approach to supporting university research,

teaching and recruitment achievements. It also means the PE Manager has close links with the externally facing services such

as Marketing, Press team, Alumni office and Development, as well as Internal Communications and the VCs office.

Membership of the CSF is made up of the Faculty Impact Officers working within Research and Impact Services with the PI

being PVC for Research, Professor Pam Thomas. The support structure that has developed over year one is key to ensuring

that PER is at the heart of PE activity and strategy.

PE now sits firmly within External Affairs in the Business and Regional Engagement team, alongside Community Engagement.

We retain strong links and regular contact with the Research and Impact Services team.

19

University of Birmingham

The PER Officer post was filled by a candidate who had previously worked part-time as the University’s PE Coordinator in

2014, a role funded using Wellcome ISSF/EPSRC IAA funds. Alignment of the CSF project with Research Planning Team was a

strategic institutional decision, which sought to align PER with activity to support research Impact, rather than with other

institutionally-important but distinct activities e.g. Marketing & Communications for student recruitment and dissemination

activities, or Outreach for widening participation.

University of Southampton

The PER unit will co-locate with the Public Policy and Southampton team and will host key associates from the Arts and

Culture team and the Talk to US! Schools University Partnership Initiative. The Engaged University Steering Group will become

the high-level focus for ongoing work.

The unit is a core member of a cross-University evaluation of engagement working group hosted by our Research &

Innovation Service.

Cambridge chose to move their team during the course of the project

University of Cambridge

During the course of our CSF period a strategic decision was taken to move the management of the project from the PE team

to the Research Strategy Office. This has provided a clear route for oversight of the CSF by the Pro-Vice-Chancellor for

Research and has ensured that the CSF objectives are aligned to other institutional strategic initiatives for impact. This change

has allowed us to build on the existing partnerships between the PE and Research Strategy offices, and provides a direct route

by which PER can be embedded into University research policies and practices.

The new arrangements work as follows:

Governance of the CSF and the CSF coordinator role are now positioned within the University Research Strategy Office (RSO).

The RSO supports the Pro-Vice-Chancellor for Research in managing strategic initiatives for impact, REF and knowledge

exchange including Impact Acceleration Accounts and HEIF. Transferring the management of the CSF to the RSO facilitates

inclusion of PER in other institution-wide initiatives. Repositioning the role has also strengthened existing partnership working

on a number of CSF outputs including:

Co-running PE with Research Awards and Impact Awards.

Co-selection of ‘strong’ PE-based cases from analysis of REF impact case studies.

Joint development of advice documents and webpages to support researchers in planning and evidencing PE.

Contributions to the Pathways to Impact working group.

The PE team in the Office of External Affairs and Communications continues to supply PE opportunities for researchers across

the six academic schools. The CSF coordinator continues to work closely with the PE team to develop the messaging around

PER and leverage the impact of existing and future PE activity.

Additional support for PE is provided by staff based in departments, faculties and institutes, whose roles incorporate

elements of engagement and knowledge exchange. This includes the co-ordinators of cross-institution Interdisciplinary

Research Centres (IRCs), Strategic Research Initiatives (SRI) and Strategic Research Networks (SRN) managed by the RSO. CSF

funding has allowed partnerships between the CSF coordinator and the IRC, SRI, SRN coordinators to be developed into the

early phases of a professional network. Additionally, the CSF has facilitated collaboration with the Wellcome ISSF PE

coordinator including co-funding:

• PE seed fund; to support innovative, research-led PE activity.

A new training programme for researchers in evidencing and evaluating their PE initiatives.

20

The NCCPE worked with the Catalysts for PER to produce a summary of the different choices you might make about where to

site your team. This may help you to weigh up the options (more details can be found in the full report):

Location of team Advantages Challenges

Marketing and

communications

Externally focused so understand the

need to engage with those outside the

organisation

Well resourced

For some marketing is all about ‘what

stories we tell, the content we create, and

the part research plays in this narrative’

(PS)

Confusion between engagement vs

marketing the university

Focus more on dissemination than

collaboration

Research services Supports PE with research

Key staff working across different

aspects of engagement

Focused on supporting research and

research staff

Helps ‘join up’ PE with other types of

external research engagement

May not engage with wider engagement

agendas of institution

Lack of credibility with some academics

who see this as part of the bureaucracy of

their institution

Vice chancellor’s

office

Senior level buy in and leadership

High profile

Gets onto agenda of key meetings

Can feel top down

High profile, therefore if something

doesn’t work it has disproportionate

negative impact

Distributed team

(across faculties)

Variety of perspectives

Led by academics and support staff

Ground up

Lack of resources to facilitate change

Expectation management – once the team

exists there is an assumption it has

dedicated resource in terms of people and

funding

Researcher

development

Links to core agenda re staff

development

Supports PE with research

May not engage with wider engagement

agendas of institution

Academic

department

Credibility with researchers

Wealth of practical experience with

engagement

Funds buy more professional time than

academic time

High staff turnover with early career

researchers juggling contracts

Useful resources

Useful sources of data about attitudes to and uptake of PE include the following:

The Factors Affecting Public Engagement by UK Researchers survey

21

Conducted by a consortium of funders in 2015/16, this survey provides useful insight into the current state of play nationally.

If your institution participated and you would like access to the data, you can contact the Engaging Researchers team at

Wellcome. https://wellcome.ac.uk/news/what-are-barriers-uk-researchers-engaging-public

CROS and PIRLS surveys

Vitae administers annual surveys of PIs and researchers, and these provide useful evidence of attitudes to and uptake of PE in

your institution. You can find out more here:

The Careers in Research Online survey (CROS): https://www.vitae.ac.uk/impact-and-evaluation/cros

The Principal Investigators and Research Leaders survey (PIRLS): https://www.vitae.ac.uk/impact-and-evaluation/pirls

NCCPE Engage Watermark

The NCCPE recently launched the Engage Watermark. Acting in a similar way to a charter mark, the Watermark is awarded to

institutions to recognise their strategic support for public engagement and their commitment to improve the support offered.

Institutions applying for the Engage Watermark receive a synthesis of key data relating to their institution, enabling them to recognise core strengths as well as highlight areas for development. This intelligence gathering provides a rich source of data to strengthen the institution’s support for impactful public engagement.

https://www.publicengagement.ac.uk/work-with-us/engage-watermark

22

DEVELOP RATIONALE, NARRATIVE AND STRATEGY; CONSIDER

SUSTAINABILITY

In a nutshell

The first two triggers help to build intelligence and insight and provide a solid platform to begin to develop your strategy.

Four areas need attention to move from intelligence gathering to action:

Clarifying your definition of PE: ‘PE’ is a very broad term encompassing a range of possible motivations and approaches.

You therefore need to work with colleagues to find a way of describing your scope

Developing a compelling narrative and rationale: distilling why PE matters

Developing a strategy and action plan: to focus where you will put your efforts to realise your ambition

Establishing effective governance arrangements to ensure effective scrutiny and ownership of your work

Make sure that you always keep in mind how the work will be sustained beyond the lifetime of your project.

The teams all recognised the need to explore the ‘meaning’ or PE to their colleagues, and the importance of developing a

definition that rang true and made sense in their institution.

University of Birmingham

We are working with the University Research Committee to collectively enhance messaging around the differences between

PER, involvement, participation and outreach. These concepts are not synonymous. Furthermore, our survey revealed an

ongoing need to shift understanding of PER from dissemination/one-off events to engagement with legacy and potential for

impact.

For all, this meant working out the relationship between different kinds of external engagement activity, such as outreach and

patient involvement. Oxford’s focus was firmly on PE with Research, which it defined as having a relationship with other kinds of

engagement, but as distinct from them. It developed a diagram to clarify its definition:

University of Oxford

Widening participation; community, business, policy and industry engagement are all extremely important areas of activity at

Oxford, and indeed can be an outcome of PE activity, but they do not fall within the remit of our PE with Research strategy or

programme. These boundaries do feel somewhat artificial on occasion, but until there is a critical mass of understanding at

Oxford, which is a very large and complex institution, as to PE with Research and how to plan and deliver excellence, it needs

its own defined programme of activity. As such we have aimed to ensure that Oxford’s PE with Research definition and vision

is focused, and this has, in turn, enabled the activities that we funded through CSF to clearly stay within scope.

23

Oxford University’s representation of PE with Research (PER)

Keeping the Plan tightly focused on PER (not general PE; knowledge exchange; widening participation; open access; industrial

or policy engagement) was essential to give focus and prevent ‘mission-creep’.

Southampton developed a ‘spectrum’ of engagement to help focus conversations with colleagues on the type of PE which was

meaningful to them, and to help them see it in the context of other possible approaches. Imperial chose to frame PE within a

broader term set of terms: ‘Engagement with Research’ and ‘Societal Engagement’.

Imperial College London

Engagement with Research is about engaging the research community, as well as engaging the ‘public’. It’s an approach

rather than a ‘target audience’. Engagement with Research was used, and a decision taken to drop the word ‘Public’. This felt

more inclusive and appropriate to our approach.

Working on definitions alone is not enough. A compelling narrative needs to emerge to capture the spirit and ambition of

colleagues. Over time, the CSFs found such narratives beginning to emerge:

University of Leeds

Our newly co-developed vision for PE with research is that PE is part of impactful research and something that we do; it is not

a separate activity. Therefore PE is integrated into the research cycle and can occur at all stages of the research cycle. We

embrace PE because it is our social responsibility, we want to increase the trust in our research with the community, we are

accountable to the public as the funders of our research and we want to increase our research relevance, making it more

impactful.

24

University of Oxford

At the University of Oxford we believe that PE enriches research and society and are committed to enabling our researchers

to inspire, consult and collaborate with the public. Our vision is to embed high-quality and innovative PE as an integral part of

research culture and practice at Oxford, enhancing our position as a world-leading research institution.

University of Liverpool

"The University views engagement as an underpinning ethos – a way in which we go about our business – rather than an add-

on activity. Effective relationships with people and organisations from a broad range of sectors and backgrounds enable us to

extend our reach and increase our impact. They also provide our students and staff with truly rewarding experiences and a

whole range of distinctive opportunities to achieve research and teaching excellence.“

Prof. Dinah Birch, Pro-Vice-Chancellor for Research & Impact

Imperial College London

Our Societal Engagement Framework has been developed to realise our strategic commitment to ‘sharing the wonder and

importance of what we do’ with a broad public audience. In the Foreword to our 2015-20 Strategy, President Alice Gast states

that ‘it is important that we excite and inspire the public, from potential new students to eager lifelong learners, by sharing

what we do in ways that arouse curiosity, awaken a love of discovery, and broaden the understanding of an increasingly

complex world.’

‘Developments have gone hand-in-hand with the collaborative creation of a clear institutional PER Strategy, which has now

been approved by the University’s Research Committee’ (Birmingham).

All of the projects sought to capture their approach in a strategic plan. These took a variety of forms. We summarise the Imperial

story below. Following extensive consultation, they chose to approach this through the lens of Societal Engagement, with PE

enshrined within the resulting framework:

The Imperial story:

An institutional framework

The distinctiveness of Imperial’s approach to the CSF has been to position PE with research within a broader institutional

project to develop a Societal Engagement (SE) Framework. This is an integrated approach across four main types of SE, which

we represent in a curved diagram to acknowledge the relationship of these activities as part of a broader pattern of

stakeholder engagement across the institution:

25

Strategy: We have developed and launched a Societal Engagement Framework that enshrines a commitment to PE as core to

our mission and strategy.

The ongoing development and implementation of the SE Framework is overseen by the Societal Engagement Group, chaired

by Professor Dallman. This group comprises the leads for each of the work streams, together with student representation and

leading champions for engagement. Regular monthly update reports will be submitted to the Provost’s Board, together with

an annual review.

As part of the Societal Engagement Framework, we have developed an institutional Action Plan to strengthen how we

recognise, support and embed engagement with the public as an integral part of our work. The framework and action plan

have been approved by our Provost’s Board and we have started the implementation of actions across all areas of the

framework.

Over the past six months, a series of cross-College work streams have been working to set objectives and develop concrete

action plans for each thematic area of the Societal Engagement Framework. These action plans have been integrated to form

a cohesive working plan, which will be reviewed regularly and updated. The first SE Framework Action Plan was approved by

the Provost’s Board in May 2016.

Imperial are now working on an engagement with research strategic plan. This document aims to encourage a consistent

philosophy and attitude to engagement with research among researchers and engagement practitioners across the College,

whilst encouraging individual creativity and high-quality engagement.

‘Establishing the purpose and boundaries of this plan has been difficult because engagement with research overlaps with

other strategic priorities owned by different areas of Imperial. Showing the complementary nature of these relationships is

crucial, but this can lead to a very lengthy and complex document, which we need to avoid!’

Governance arrangements are vital to ensure that the strategic intentions are properly scrutinised and ‘owned’ across the

institution. The CSFs approached this in different ways, but all sought to invest in some form of oversight of their work. The

University of Cambridge had a PE advisory group offering academic oversight of PER, whilst Glasgow University’s PE Strategy

Group ensured that researchers and engagement partners have a strong and effective voice within the institution.

University of Warwick

The Vice-Chancellor appointed a PVC for External Engagement to further his ambitions for increased and improved regional

engagement. Professor Simon Swain now leads the PE Steering Group (PESG) which will enable guidance to practitioners

across the University while having influence on senior administration as to how to best support PE. The group includes PVC

Pam Thomas, the PE Manager and a range of highly engaged practitioners at the coal face of activity and who are able to

inform and challenge the university to be more effective in its practical and financial support for PE.

26

University of Oxford

In order to demonstrate that PER is part of ‘normal’ practice and culture there are advantages to embedding it into existing

mechanisms rather than creating new ones (for example, we did not create a new Committee for PER – instead PER is now

the remit of the University’s Research Committee).

University of Cambridge

We have taken steps to formalise the governance of PE at the University with our PE Advisory Group (PEAG), established in

year one, now reporting to the Research Policy Committee with a formal terms of reference. We have renewed our PEAG

membership with four new academic champions driving forward PE strategy development in their respective Schools, and

have introduced a new member from the University of Cambridge Museums.

University of Birmingham

The PE Working Group (PEWG) has been renamed as PERC (PE with Research Committee) and now reports regularly to the

institution’s Research Committee chaired by the Pro-Vice Chancellor for Research & Knowledge Transfer (PVC R&KT, also CSF

Principle Investigator (PI)), resulting in a greater awareness of PER activities amongst the five College Directors of Research

(DoRs) and key senior Professional Services leads.

It is vital that you are considering how the work might be sustained beyond the period of funding. A key way to do this was

detailed in Trigger 1, where projects sought to establish alignment with other sources of funding and long term drivers of activity

in the institution.

Useful resources

Defining PE

The NCCPE definition and more detailed descriptions of PE:

https://www.publicengagement.ac.uk/explore-it/what-public-engagement

The University of Southampton’s PE Spectrum:

http://www.southampton.ac.uk/assets/imported/transforms/content-

block/UsefulDownloads_Download/08D2A80F3FA746EFAA355C3B94C864F3/Soton-PE-spectrum.pdf

PE Strategies

The following CSFs have published their PE strategies online:

The University of Birmingham: https://thinkpe.wordpress.com/about-us/uob-per-strategy/

The University of Leeds: http://comms.leeds.ac.uk/wp-

content/uploads/sites/7/2017/01/PE_strategic_plan_Leeds_2016_06.pdf

The University of Oxford: http://bit.ly/OxfordPERstrategyhttp://bit.ly/OxfordPERstrategy

Imperial College London Societal Engagement Framework: https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-

college/about/leadership-and-strategy/associate-provost-ap/public/Societal-Engagement-Framework-

(PDF).pdfhttps://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/about/leadership-and-strategy/associate-provost-

ap/public/Societal-Engagement-Framework-(PDF).pdf

27

Advisory group / steering group terms of reference

University of Southampton Engaged University Steering group:

http://www.southampton.ac.uk/per/about/steering_group.page

University of Cambridge PE Advisory Group: https://www.cam.ac.uk/public-engagement/public-engagement-

advisory-group

University of Birmingham PE with Research committee: https://thinkpe.wordpress.com/about-us/perc/

Reflections from the Catalysts on the challenges and opportunities afforded by advisory groups can be found in the catalyst

report: https://www.publicengagement.ac.uk/sites/default/files/publication/nccpe_catalyst_report_may_2016.pdf

28

In a nutshell

The first three triggers recognise how important it is to reflect, take stock and clarify your focus – but it is also important to

get started doing something, to demonstrate your value and intent.

There are a variety of ‘quick wins’ which you might chose to invest in, including:

Developing a training offer

Offering platforms and opportunities to engage

Creating a seed fund

Offering high profile awards

Investing in web based resources and tools

Raising the visibility of your work

Offering a service linked to grant funding

This section provides an overview of their activity in each of these areas, and the key lessons learned.

29

DEVELOP A

TRAINING OFFER

All of the CSFs developed effective training for their research community. The University of Glasgow offered researcher

development opportunities including seminars, conferences, and workshops. These have been enthusiastically embraced by

researchers.

University of Birmingham

Our CSF focus on embedding PER skills across the institution examined training and development opportunities, as well as

mentoring and peer support.

Over the past year we have piloted and explored a range of training approaches, including working with the RPT, drawing

on good practice from elsewhere. Capacity-building was core to our bid, as PER-specific training and networking

opportunities are common suggestions for improvement in feedback received via our research community.

Our PER Officer has set up and run a very successful “Leading to Engage” (L2E) programme, training a cohort of

enthusiastic PER champions for each of our five Colleges; they will become members of PERC and work with the College

Directors of research to implement the PER Strategy ‘on the ground’ within each College.

University of Birmingham

The CSF team sought to develop effective training. This included:

Targeted training (i.e. aimed at developing specific skills, or at a particular group of staff) is more successful than

generic training, but ultimately people learn through doing PER.

Peer-to-peer training, which they found can be effective, especially amongst postgraduate and early-career

researchers (PGRs / ECRs) who are great advocates of PER, but turnover rates and costs demand sustainable in-house

options.

Offering training followed by guaranteed off-campus PER opportunities is not straightforward as participation at many

major festivals can have major cost implications and/or requires coherent proposal submissions 6-12 months in advance,

infeasible within CSF timeframe and without a guaranteed funding stream longer term.

30

Imperial College London

Training should aim to be integrated within the wider Professional Development infrastructure at the institution in order to

have a wide impact and remain sustainable. Skills underpinning engagement with research are very similar to skills needed

for wider societal engagement activity and therefore we recommend a SE competency Framework to underpin the training

offered.

University of Glasgow

The appetite for learning and developmental opportunities was higher than expected, with seminars and workshops filling

quickly to capacity. We also realised early on that to create content truly suitable for the research community it had to be

prepared in consultation with them and where possible feature examples from within the University. It was also

particularly valuable to a have local (School and Institute) advocates to encourage colleagues to take part in the events.

We found it particularly valuable to share session evaluation data with delegates in an open and honest process

demonstrating the value and use of their opinions. This is exemplified by feedback following the sharing of one such

report:

“I thought that it was excellent the way Jamie followed up with the analysis of the evaluation forms and included action

points and observations. I have never had that with forms I completed and made me feel that he takes it seriously and

something will happen as a result.”

Useful resources

Here is a snapshot of the training programmes offered by some of the CSF projects

University of Birmingham training programme: https://thinkpe.wordpress.com/perform/public-engagement-

workshops/ and Leading to Engage programme: https://thinkpe.wordpress.com/about-us/leading-to-engage-

champions/

University of Southampton: http://www.southampton.ac.uk/per/support/training.page

University of Oxford: http://www.ox.ac.uk/research/public-engagement/support-researchers

The NCCPE’s website provides guidance on how to develop a successful programme of learning and professional

development activities: https://www.publicengagement.ac.uk/support-it/planning-change/learning

The NCCPE also offers a range of training resources and courses: https://www.publicengagement.ac.uk/work-with-us

31

DEVELOP

PLATFORMS AND

OPPORTUNITIES FOR

ENGAGEMENT

Alongside formal training offers, lots of the CSFs also sought to create accessible and purposeful platforms to allow researchers

to practice their engagement.

King’s College London’s project was built around the newly commissioned Science Gallery:

In 2013 King’s invested in Science Gallery London as a porous membrane between King’s and the city. The gallery is due to

open on the Guy’s Campus at London Bridge in 2018 as a space where art and science collide. Attracting over 350,000

visitors each year, it will have a particular focus on 15 to 25 year-olds. It will have no permanent collection but a changing

programme of content focussed on three annual themes, each one of global concern. Through an open call process, the

gallery will curate and host exhibitions, events, performances, online activities, debates and festivals illuminating these

themes. It will bring science, technology and health into dialogue with the arts and design in an unprecedented way,

inspiring new thinking in researchers, academics, young people and local communities and provoking new approaches to

contemporary challenges.

Prior to opening, Science Gallery London has been working with artists, local communities, King’s research staff and

students to run a series of pop-up seasons including ‘FREQUENCIES: Tune into Life’ (2014), ‘FED UP: The future of food’

(2015), and ‘MOUTHY: Into the orifice’ (2016). During 2017 the gallery will host its final pop-up season ‘BLOOD’. Enhancing

the PE opportunities for King’s staff and students during MOUTHY and BLOOD has been a large focus of the current CSF

award.

Although King’s are committed to harnessing the myriad of opportunities afforded by Science Gallery London for

enhancing a culture where PE is valued and practised to a high standard, the gallery has no official remit (or funding) to

provide centralised support for PE.

The other projects took a range of approaches.

University of Leeds

Leeds developed a range of opportunities, including:

The Being Human and Be Curious festivals

Pairing researchers with museums: The aim is to enable effective training of researchers for engaging the public and

providing opportunities to engage with specific audiences. The partnership work currently includes the Thackray

Medical Museum, the Royal Armouries and EUREKA! The children museum

Second year undergraduate module on PE open to all disciplines

32

University of Southampton

A major aspect of the Southampton CSF project is the development of high-quality platforms. In October 2016 our

Festivals Lead indicated she would be leaving the UK at the end of December. We took the opportunity to review job roles

and descriptions, creating an Operations Lead post to cover delivery of all our major platforms. The Festivals Lead

delivered the Human Worlds Festival in November, and the full team will deliver the major Southampton Science and

Engineering Festival in March.

University of Warwick

Warwick’s 50th Anniversary celebrations during 2015 focused significantly on engagement. We were a Principal Partner in

the four Cheltenham Festivals where our research was presented at five leading events, and we had leading academics

participating in debates and workshops at the Science and Literature Festivals respectively. Our own Festival of the

Imagination in October 2015 (8500 visitors to campus over two days), the Warwick Commission, Annual Christmas

Lectures and the Creative Exchange all continue to provide platforms for PER. The success of the Festival of Imagination

remains fresh in the institutions memory. It served as a platform for many departments to demonstrate their research

excellence to a wide audience and another festival of similar scale is currently being considered. The idea of using festivals

to give the public access to our research is becoming a theme for the PE Unit to develop. We are looking at ways to place

academics into this environment and provide them with training and support, whether that is for panel discussions,

debates, demonstrations, or giving talks. We are also considering partnering festivals and exploring possible partnerships

with groups, we developed during the 50th Anniversary year.

Useful resources

Here is a selection of links to some of the platforms developed by the CSF teams

Leeds: The Being Human and Be Curious festivals (also http://www.stem.leeds.ac.uk/events/lfos/lfos-public-

programme/becurious/ )

Southampton: the Human Worlds Festival in November and Southampton Science and Engineering Festival

Warwick: details of the university’s involvement in Cheltenham Festivals, including 2015 Science and 2015

Literature; and Warwick’s own Festival of the Imagination in October 2015 and Creative Exchange

The NCCPE has produced various guides to working with festivals which can be accessed here:

https://www.publicengagement.ac.uk/do-it/who-work-with/working-with-festivals

33

CREATE A SEED

FUND

Most of the CSF projects chose to create ‘seed’ or development funds to invite staff and students to develop their own projects.

As demonstrated by the Catalysts before them, seed funds provide a key way to encourage excellent practice, and stimulate

new ideas and connections. By providing clear criteria, funding and supporting excellent projects, creating a learning culture

between the projects, and sharing the stories throughout the institution, creates a real energy and enthusiasm for quality

engagement. We’ve captured below the learning from the University of Oxford’s fund.

University of Oxford : PE with Research Seed Fund

CSF funding was used to set up the University’s first Public Engagement with Research Seed Fund to provide small grants

for researchers to pilot new PER projects or improve existing activity. Applications from those new or experienced in Public

Engagement with Research were encouraged. 35 applications were received from researchers and academics across

different disciplines

The applications were reviewed by the CSF PM and Divisional Public Engagement Leads from and both the applications and

the reviews were sent to the Academic Funding Panel (made up of one senior academic from each academic Division) that

made the funding recommendations.

Just over £12,500 was provided by the CSF grant; an additional £4.5K was leveraged from internal funds, which enabled a

further 3 projects to be funded.

A summary of two of the Awarded Projects is provided below:

Dr Armand D’Angour, Faculty of Classics

Project title: Recreating sounds of ancient Greek music

Purpose: To inform & inspire

Objective: To engage the public with Dr D’Angour’s research by recreating sounds and songs that are derived from ancient

Greek documents (preserved on stone and papyrus) with a team of musicians, a singer and reconstructed ancient

instruments (e.g. aulos and lyre).

Professor Chris Lintott, Department of Physics

Project title: Planet Hunters

Purpose: To collaborate

Objective: Planet Hunters (www.planethunters.org) is a citizen science project running on The Zooniverse platform.

Thousands of volunteers worldwide are searching through data from the Kepler telescope to detect planets orbiting

distant stars. This project is aimed at increasing the awareness of exoplanet research among young people, specifically

those between the ages of 15 and 18 years old, which are the most underrepresented demographic. The project produced

a toolkit for researchers to support their outreach activities and online resources specifically for this demographic to

34

increase understanding and awareness of the project and to get directly involved and undertaking their own real and

cutting edge exoplanet research.

Key Learning: Small grants for PER can make a big difference to researchers being able to progress with their public

engagement plans, however there is potential to develop more robust evaluation plans for these activities. As such, the

PER Seed Fund for 2016-17 will include a compulsory evaluation workshop/ surgery for awardees to attend and develop an

evaluation plan at the beginning of their project, with the support of an external evaluation consultant.

Useful resources

Here are links to some of the other seed fund schemes launched by the CSF projects

Cambridge: https://www.cam.ac.uk/public-engagement/public-engagement-seed-fund

Imperial: https://www.imperial.ac.uk/about/leadership-and-strategy/provost/academic-

partnerships/societal-engagement-seed-fund/

Liverpool: https://www.liverpool.ac.uk/health-and-life-sciences/public-engagement/funding/#z

Southampton: http://www.southampton.ac.uk/per/support/funding.page?

Oxford: http://www.ox.ac.uk/research/public-engagement/support-researchers (click the Funding tab)

35

REWARD AND

RECOGNITION:

AWARDS

A number of the CSF projects established Awards schemes, often integrating a new PE Award into existing award schemes.

University of Glasgow

For the first time Staff and Students have had the opportunity to apply for formal awards recognising PE and to share their

own personal engagement stories with their peer group.

University of Cambridge

Recognition and reward of the researcher community was addressed through the implementation of annual Vice-

Chancellor’s awards

Imperial College London

We have launched a prestigious new awards scheme, The President’s Awards for Excellence in Societal Engagement, and

received a large number of high-quality nominations

University of Oxford

We sought to raise the profile and reward and recognise high-quality PER through our inaugural Vice-Chancellor’s Awards

for PER. 88 entries were received and 12 winners announced. The awards generated best practice case studies, which we

have made available on the PER Portal on the university’s website.

Lessons learned about awards

University of Birmingham

Participating in award schemes is fairly time-consuming for researchers and a large number of entries are therefore

unlikely.

We will investigate other less time-consuming competitions such as ‘Images of Research’, which already operates through

the Graduate School, though currently this is open only to postgraduates.

36

Imperial College London

We received no nominations from the Business School, our fourth Faculty, suggesting we need to form better relationships

and communications for the 2017 awards to encourage nominations, a process that has already started and progress has

been encouraging.

University of Oxford

We deliberately choose 12 winners; and only one overall winner – with the aim that we could make as many people as

possible feel rewarded; however - there were still a large number of entries that were of winning quality that did not get

shortlisted; but we did provide very positive feedback.

The categories were carefully thought about; consulted upon and worked well for Oxford: enabling us to achieve our aim

of focusing on the activities and projects themselves (to inspire others) as well as the people involved.

What would we do differently: with the given resources – we did reach out to a wider audience through social media;

newsletters as much as was feasible – but would like to capitalise on all new content that was created – the printed and

filmed case studies; ceremony film etc – much more for 2017.

Lessons learned generally about reward and recognition

University of Liverpool

Reward and recognition are a vital step towards delivering culture change. However, the project, and the dialogue it has

created around this topic have highlighted that simply introducing new awards and HR processes is not the full answer. For

these new interventions to generate buy-in, colleagues need to recognise them as transparent, fair, well managed and free

from institutional politics. Such is the University’s structure, that responsibility for the full implementation of these

intervention lies with a variety of staff teams – so there can be logistical challenges in ensuring that the final delivery stays

“on message”. For example, promotions need to be handled and articulated carefully; promotions criteria looking at PER

need to be applied as rigorously as for anything else; otherwise people may falsely expect to be promoted for doing very

little, or poor quality PER.

University of Birmingham

Reward and recognition of PER requires the patronage of senior management, able to enact change in institutional

procedures and policies, whilst simultaneously being able to manage expectations on the ground.

Useful resources

You can access details of some of the CSF Awards Schemes here:

University of Cambridge: https://www.cam.ac.uk/public-engagement/public-engagement-with-research-awards

University of Glasgow: http://www.gla.ac.uk/services/publicengagement/peawards/

The NCCPE website contains useful additional information about how to approach Reward and Recognition:

https://www.publicengagement.ac.uk/support-it/planning-change/recognition

The NCCPE has also produced a guide to running awards schemes and competitions:

https://www.publicengagement.ac.uk/sites/default/files/publication/guide_to_running_a_competition_0.pdf

37

WEB BASED

RESOURCES AND

TOOLS

All of the CSF projects used the web and most used social media to promote their activity. Details of social media activity is

included in the next section. One key use of the web was to collate case studies and share best practice.

University of Warwick

An active and vibrant website is seen as a key tool for communicating our PER activities. We are beginning to realise that

by creating content for the web pages they can easily be repurposed for a variety of other channels – internal

comms/campus digital screens/departmental webpages.

Imperial College London

Our advice is to lead with audio, film and images rather than lots of copy, and to learn from the approaches at other

universities. It also vital to evaluate the usability and effectiveness of the case studies among your target audience.

King’s College London

Creating resources is time consuming, but pays off in the long run where there is a need. We would advise making use of

resources that already exist (e.g. NCCPE, RCUK) in the first instance.

University of Oxford

All of the shared learning from others; and the resources available from the NCCPE have been invaluable and we believe

has had a significant impact on the progress we have been able to make during our CSF project.

Agreeing to have the webpages on the main University website was a key achievement and involved engaging the core

Central Communications team about the value of PER before initiating conversations about the benefit of PER webpages as

part of the University’s website.

Whilst there is a need for PER pages for staff, there is also a need to consider how the people you are hoping to engage with

outside your university an find out about your public engagement work, and whether the website offers a useful portal for them

to get involved. This can lead to challenges with the Marketing and Communications teams whose primary audiences are

potential students. It can also take some time to get new website content onto institutional websites, and therefore it is worth

planning this early.

38

Useful resources

Reflections from the Catalysts on the challenges of developing web content can be found in the Catalyst report:

https://www.publicengagement.ac.uk/sites/default/files/publication/nccpe_catalyst_report_may_2016.pdf

CSF webpages

You can access the CSF webpages here, and explore the variety of approaches they developed:

Imperial College London: https://www.imperial.ac.uk/about/leadership-and-strategy/provost/academic-

partnerships/societal-engagement/

University of Birmingham: https://thinkpe.wordpress.com/

University of Cambridge: https://www.cam.ac.uk/public-engagement

University of Glasgow: http://www.gla.ac.uk/services/publicengagement/

University of Leeds: http://comms.leeds.ac.uk/public-engagement/

University of Oxford: http://www.ox.ac.uk/research/public-engagement

University of Southampton: http://www.southampton.ac.uk/per

University of Warwick: http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/about/community/publicengagement/

39

RAISING VISIBILITY

All the projects worked quickly to try to raise their visibility, using a range of techniques including events and marketing

materials.

University of Glasgow

The short time period allowed for regular events giving PE high visibility across the University, demonstrating the

importance and value placed upon it.

University of Southampton

We continue to work with other regional HEIs and NGOs on shared engagement projects, primarily via the Bringing

Research to Life Roadshow. The unit’s new visibility will allow us to support or facilitate a number of recognition awards

and new researcher-led activities in PE.

Through a series of consultative meetings, the PER strategy has been distilled and widely-circulated in postcard format

across the institution.

University of Birmingham

We have run two annual PER days. The first was themed “Myth-busting the Barriers to PE”, chosen to encourage

attendees to explore examples of successful PER activity undertaken by fellow researchers despite perceived barriers. The

second explored “Interdisciplinary PE”, to encourage attendees to explore examples of PER activity approached from a

wide range of disciplines.

Imperial College London

An internal launch event for the Societal Engagement Framework took place on 14 June 2016 to galvanise interest,

support and momentum and to launch the new President’s Awards for Excellence in Societal Engagement. This event was

attended by the senior leadership team and included an opening address from Professor Maggie Dallman, together with

more than 300 staff and students who participated in societal engagement activities over the past year. An external

launch event called ‘Sharing the Wonder’ took place on 22 November 2016 to engage with key external supporters,

policymakers and collaborators.

Lessons learned about visibility

University of Liverpool

40

The project has highlighted that communications around PER need to be in plain English, devoid of excessive University

jargon. At the end of the day, we want our publics to be able to contribute to and take some ownership of our PER offering

– so sensible English matters!

The importance of joined-up communications between teams and individuals cannot be overstated. This can be

particularly challenging in a complex and largely devolved body like a university.

University of Birmingham

We learnt valuable lessons around planning the timing of events given the nature of the academic year. Summer was

challenging for academic involvement. As such we decided to hold off on second Worlds Collide event until CSF year two.

Imperial College London

The first draft of the newsletter design was corporate in style as our communications agency was not used to this kind of

communication. We had to take the lead in the design in order to make it fun and interactive with vivid colours, a fold-out

poster, competitions, events, and inspiring research stories.

University of Glasgow

High quality images can be valuable not only for reporting but in showcasing and celebrating past achievements; therefore

some of the CSF funding was deployed to employ a professional photographer to capture images of our engagement

events throughout the year.

Several projects invested significantly in social media

University of Leeds

We have found that Twitter allows us to respond directly to activity/followers and build a relationship, which then helps to

make people approach us. But the activity needs significant resource (person time) for content, management and visuals.

University of Oxford

‘The Conversation’ (https://theconversation.com/uk) has proved to be very effective tool at encouraging a good

number of researchers, from DPhil to Senior Academic, to engage the public directly with their research in their

own words; and further interact via social media (comments are encouraged) with the added bonus of potential

national and international coverage when picked up by the mainstream media.

If we had had more resource we would have spent time focusing on how to encourage these researchers that authored an

article to take the ‘next step’ in their PE journey.

The University of Liverpool added a cautionary note. There are a range of challenges for researchers new to social media, and

offering training and guidance is essential

University of Liverpool

While social media can be a powerful tool for communication, collaboration, and driving culture change - and its use is

widespread, not everybody is comfortable using it- due to concerns about privacy and online safety.

41

Useful resources

The NCCPE website offers a guide to working with digital media:

https://www.publicengagement.ac.uk/do-it/techniquesapproaches/working-with-digital-media

CSF social media feeds include:

@SciGalleryLon

@UniLeedsEngage

@uobengage

@warwickengages

@UoS_Engagement

Southampton recruited a digital engagement manager. The details of the job can be found here:

https://jobs.soton.ac.uk/Vacancy.aspx?ref=774216F8

The NCCPE has produced guidance on how to manage communications around your project effectively:

https://www.publicengagement.ac.uk/support-it/planning-change/communication

42

OFFER A SERVICE LINKED

TO GRANT FUNDING

Several of the CSFs chose to develop a specific service to help researchers access funding for their PE activity. This was the main

focus of the KCL project. The team offered researchers specialist support to develop quality PE plans, for instance to form part of

their Pathways to Impact statements. They developed a costed ’menu of services’ that researchers could choose from, and

identified a cohort of specialists in different types of engagement who could be costed into projects. A key focus was on

developing a scalable model.

Some of the lessons they learned along the way are captured below.

King’s College London

Raising the awareness of the grant consultation service you are offering with other, related, departments or services,

is key to making researchers aware and encouraging them to use the service

During the very early stages of rolling out an initiative such as Engagement Services, institutions should expect the

majority of researchers to hear about the service at the point when they are very close to submission (and the grant

deadline). This results in a very short consultation period which does not allow for adequate support or significant

changes to the Pathway to Impact statement.

With an increased consultation period we expect to see an increase in quality of the consultation process (increased

face-to-face consultations and decreased email/phone consultations) and an increase in the quality of Pathways to

Impact statements (in terms of the language used, coherence, partnerships, consideration of scale and funding etc.)

Even in cases where grant consultations have had a minor impact on the written quality of the Pathway to Impact

statement, the real impact is expected to come when the projects come to fruition

A ‘Menu of Services’ is extremely valuable, at least for back of house calculations

They identified a range of factors which can limit the impact of the grant consultation process.

Short time frames between consultation request and grant deadline

The researchers’ prior experience with engagement and understanding of impact

Lack of genuine commitment from researchers to achieve ‘impact’

Lack of confidence in the peer review process when it comes to impact statements

Lack of confidence in (and take up of) advice from professional services

A focus on ‘what’ they want to do, rather than ‘why’ they want to do it

43

Useful resources

The NCCPE website includes a section on securing funding for public engagement:

https://www.publicengagement.ac.uk/plan-it/funding

This includes guidance on how to incorporate public engagement in Pathways to Impact statements:

https://www.publicengagement.ac.uk/plan-it/funding/public-engagement-and-pathways-impact

44

In a nutshell

Capturing the impact of activities seeming to galvanise culture change is hard: many of the effects are slow to manifest

themselves, and are subtle. However, this doesn’t mean that you shouldn’t try!

The CSF projects found a number of convincing ways to demonstrate the changes they were contributing to

They developed a range of mechanisms to capture data and evidence

Many invested in a central evaluation role to help both monitor their own impact, and to support researchers to plan

effective evaluation of their engagement activity

Working with the NCCPE, the teams developed logic models to articulate their assumptions, focal points for action and the

outcomes and impacts they anticipated realising. This provided a useful framework to inform their evaluation.

The teams identified a host of challenges in evidencing the impact of their work – and this was well captured by KCL:

King’s College London

Two years is a challenging time frame to be able to evidence culture change. Especially when starting from a low baseline the

majority of this period will involve laying down foundations and putting process/procedures in place. Although these

processes can be evaluated to some extent, the actual evidence of culture change is predicted to emerge beyond this initial

period.

The teams had chosen to benchmark their position on the EDGE tool, and this provided a useful way of measuring progress. All

the projects found ways to articulate the difference their work had made, and some of the impacts it had contributed to.

University of Glasgow

The close of the first CSF funding period finds Glasgow in a stronger position with regards to PE support and culture. This is

clearly demonstrated by the self-assessment on the EDGE tool which was carried out with researchers at the start and end of

the funding period. In each of the categories analysed researchers felt the University was in a better and stronger position

that previously. At the end of the funding period 85 % of surveyed staff had observed a positive change in PE support over the

preceding 12 months.

Imperial College London

Our work to develop more embedded PE at Imperial has benefited considerably from the growing number of:

Academics enthusiastic about engaging the public with research

Academics who are exploring the philosophy and theory of PE

PE practitioners with expertise in delivery and training

Professional staff taking an active role in enabling engagement activities

The growing momentum to enable a culture of engagement with research achieved across this year is evident in a number of

ways. Over the next year the College will significantly increase its matched contribution by more than 100%. Our continuation

45

plan is to focus on enabling measures to deliver tangible, positive change, such as delivering training and developing learning

resources, creating networking opportunities, improving evaluation, and supporting and developing innovative forms of PE.

King’s College London

The principal outputs from the first year of CSF include:

• A PE Manager post in the Science Gallery team

• Establishment of ‘Engagement Services’ (a PE consultation service from Science Gallery)

• 30 initial research grant consultations (£256,000 built into grants for engagement)

• Engagement with at least 1,489 research staff and students through a new comms strategy

• 120 researchers involved in Science Gallery’s MOUTHY season

• A 5-part training course and attached seed grant for 24 Early Career Researchers

• An informal network of 18 ‘impact partners’ which meets monthly

• A King’s Engaged Researcher Network (with 207 subscribers) and 6 annual events

The main outcomes and impacts of these activities:

Science Gallery has significantly enhanced the provision of support for PE through grant consultations, training courses

and hands-on opportunities

PE is increasingly being considered (by all levels) as a fundamental part of the research process, and is being built into

grant applications

Collaboration with other ‘impact partners’ at King’s is starting to create a shared understanding and narrative for PE at

King’s, as part of our service to society

University of Leeds

What we have achieved in 12 months:

We have reached 447 people face-to face, have received 69 enquiries, have delivered 15 training sessions and supported

18 proposal submissions with a combined bid value of £28.26M including £785k for PE

We have involved 115 people in the PE strategy development which has been accepted by the senior management group

(UEG). Out of this work we have developed a framework for PE based on input from the NCCPE and the Vitae Researcher

Development Framework

The Engagement Excellence Fellowship scheme has been opened up to all faculties and five fellows have been coached

and mentored by two academic leads and the PE team for a year

The first public research open day ‘Be Curious’ in March 2016 was a huge success with over 1000 visitors, many of them

first time visitors to the University of Leeds

PE features in the University’s Annual review 2015-16

We have successfully promoted the addition of PE and outreach activities to the list of promotion-worthy activities for

academic staff

We have introduced PE awards to celebrate good PE practice; all three winners submitted to the NCCPE Engage 2016

competition

Two University of Leeds projects won in the NCCPE Engage 2016 competition and one project was a finalist (up from 2

finalists in 2014)

The University is fully supportive of the PE agenda and is securing the future of the PE team beyond August 2016 until

2019

Across the 37 dimensions of the EDGE tool, we made progress on 35 and the mean progress across all dimensions is 1.6

levels after 12 months

46

University of Liverpool

Numerous changes have been made to practices and procedures, as well as the identification of the challenges that remain

and need to be addressed in the future. It is understood that the transition to a completely engaged institution will take time

beyond the CSF, and that the project as presented is a work in progress.

The most significant and instrumental activities undertaken have included:

The establishment of a formal governance structure for PER

The compilation of the evidence base upon which the University’s strategy for PER is based

The raised visibility of the PER agenda around the University, via digital communications, and at faculty-level research &

impact committees

The delivery of a new University-funded grants scheme for PER projects – which saw five new PER projects funded

The creation of a new forum series for PER, designed to enhance understanding of PER and to provide a space for best

practice exchange. To date, the series has brought together 117 academics from across the University

The creation of a new staff award recognising Excellent Contribution to PE. The first awards will be made in December

2016

The representation of the University within the national PER community

The establishment of strategically significant links with other HEIs

The projects developed a variety of approaches to evaluation and data capture.

University of Cambridge

Through working in partnership with colleagues in the Research Strategy Office we have initiated a series of new projects

including redrafting data collection protocols for PE activity, and creation of a new Impact Planning tool and accompanying

resources to support researchers in planning meaningful, impactful engagement.

At an institutional level, the University has decided to undertake a timely review of PE which will help address the bigger

cultural questions that underpin our CSF agenda. The review will look at what PE means to the academic community at

Cambridge, which publics are being engaged, and what platforms and processes the central PE team should be investing in to

best serve our institutional needs. It provides a valuable opportunity to benchmark our existing and developing PE plans

against other institutions; and to evaluate the success of CSF-led initiatives whilst developing appropriate resourcing

structures to sustain such activities in the longer term.

University of Birmingham

• With support of our PI we will replicate Factors Affecting PE by Researchers and EDGE analyses with all members of

academic staff invited to contribute. This will give us a more robust overview and baseline.

• This survey re-test will examine whether any change has been reported in the past year. Moreover, we will establish a

baseline on which to measure progress in the short, medium and long term

• We will also probe the mismatch in how PER progress is perceived depending on career stage, working to bridge this gap

• We need to work on reporting mechanisms and incentives to maximise the opportunity to capture the success of our

own schemes, e.g. via the UoB’s CRIS system, Pure

• We will undertake the Engage Watermark process to explore our current support for PE and plan for the future

Imperial College London

47

We currently have no institutional mechanism to capture and monitor research funding applications (successful or otherwise)

that include PE. It has been agreed with the Research Office and the Finance Division that finance codes will be created for

Societal Engagement, and this will facilitate information capture. The Engagement Coordinator (Evaluation and Impact) will

work with faculties to develop a baseline.

University of Southampton

An Evaluation Toolkit has been developed and piloted, and the Evaluation Officer and the Digital Engagement Officer

have been able to support recipients of the PER Development Fund 2016/17 round

We need to be fully integrated with Research & Innovation Services grant-tracking and research data services (e.g. use of

PURE system)

University of Leeds

Collection of PE activities has been facilitated through the amendment of an existing systems; the input screen has been

evaluated in two rounds with academics and the system is to go live in June. It will not only allow a more accurate reporting

of HESA BCI relevant data, it will be also be a mapping tool for PE across the institution.

Several chose to invest in specific roles to oversee their evaluation activity. These roles faced in two directions: outwards, to

provide support to researchers to evaluate their engagement activity; and inwards, to help the teams evaluate their own culture

change activity.

Imperial College London

The recruitment and embedding of a new Engagement Coordinator (Evaluation and Impact) is underway. This post is line

managed by the CSF-funded PE Manager, and a significant proportion of the role is to support researchers in developing

provision for PE in their grant applications and their ongoing practice, as well as helping us to measure culture change in

terms of embedding engagement with research.

This role has a very broad remit and ad hoc demands from all parts of Imperial are very high. We are working towards

developing a proactive and strategic approach rather than a reactive approach. We are looking to establish some consistent

KPIs across all areas of activity in order to develop an ‘overview’ of progress across multiple activities.

University of Southampton

To make a step-change in evaluation we need a dedicated resource. To that end we have recruited an evaluation officer for

the CSF2 period. We can already see the benefits of a dedicated staff member in this area.

KCL provided a helpful summary of some of the key lessons they learned:

King’s College London

• Building surveys into support pipelines increases the response rate compared to circulating a survey around the

institution via email. This is also a useful time point to gather data which indicates how much PE experience the

researcher has, enabling the grant consultation to be appropriately pitched

• Evaluation forms for PE workshops were provided as hard copies to enhance response rates by completing the forms

during the workshop, however this becomes resource heavy (data input). Consider an electronic version which can be

completed on phones/lap tops during the workshops to get a good balance of high response rate and low data input

• In the diverse contexts in which the CSFs are being delivered, examples of good practice from the Beacons and other

Catalysts may not always be applicable, but the reporting structures sometimes implicitly assume a particular model.

Reporting on culture change in a different institutional context is extremely challenging. This is compounded by the pace

of progress, which is necessarily slow as culture change is being built from the ground up (involving a certain amount of

48

trial and error and experimentation), as opposed to building on frameworks which have been in place for several years

using tried and tested methods

In planning your approach, you may find it useful to review the final evaluation report for the Catalyst projects (2012 – 15). This

helped to clarify the types of impact which can meaningfully be aimed for and realised in investments of this kind. In a nutshell,

the report suggests that the projects contributed to the following outcome areas:

Impacts realised by the Catalysts for PER

Conceptual impacts • Develop and establish a shared understanding of PER

Instrumental impacts

• Help to develop and support examples of embedded PER in practice

• Make changes to job descriptions, performance reviews and promotion criteria

• Provide evidence of PER-led promotions

• Make changes to workload management to include PER support and activities

• Establish PER award schemes

• Make a financial commitment to PER Provide practical support for core research activities

which emphasise importance of PER

• Measure quality and impact of PER activities

• Support funding applications and plans for research projects

• Set up seed funding or grants schemes

• Develop PER resources

• Embed commitment to PER in corporate plans

• Develop institutional PER strategies, or include PER in other strategies and planning

documents

Capacity building impacts

• Provide training and opportunities for professional development

• Provide and sign-post PER platforms and opportunities

• Create senior leadership and engagement champions to oversee and promote PER

• Create internal networks to share good practice, support staff and celebrate PE

• Contribute to wider networks supportive of PE

Useful resources

The RCUK-commissioned evaluation report of the Catalyst projects can be accessed here:

http://www.rcuk.ac.uk/documents/skills/rcukpercatalystsprogrammeinterimsummary-pdf/

The NCCPE website contains a range of useful resources to help you plan the evaluation of PE activities:

https://www.publicengagement.ac.uk/plan-it/evaluating-public-engagement

The NCCPE offers training in evaluation, including the use of logic models:

https://www.publicengagement.ac.uk/work-with-us/training

49

In a nutshell

Culture change is – by definition – a long game: cultures are slow to change, and need sustained pressure if short term gains

are to ‘stick’. With this in mind, the CSF teams needed to ensure that the relatively short window within which they were

working would not come to an abrupt end.

In some cases, the team sought to secure funding to allow them to continue – moving their funding from project income to

core, strategic funding from their university. In other cases, they sought to ensure that the services and products they had

developed were integrated into the activity of other key agents within their institution.

In most cases, it was a bit of both. Common to all was the need to be thinking about ‘what next’ from the outset.

Imperial College London

The growing momentum to enable a culture of engagement with research achieved across this year is evident in a number of

ways. Over the next year the College will significantly increase its matched contribution by more than 100%. Our continuation

plan is to focus on enabling measures to deliver tangible, positive change, such as delivering training and developing learning

resources, creating networking opportunities, improving evaluation and supporting and developing innovative forms of PE,

University of Southampton

£60k of CSF resource leveraged £164k of matched funding in the grant period and a 3 year institutional commitment of £300k

p.a. from September 2016.

University of Warwick

• The CSF Fund has been invaluable in securing the underpinning for a PE Unit to be created, with confirmed three year

contracts for three new roles at the grades needed

• Advertising three-year roles has meant that we have recruited excellent and talented staff that will develop into a strong

team. Evidence of this is already pleasing to see. It has also demonstrated that the University supports PE going forward.

This commitment is being seen by many researchers and other departments we work with, both academic and

administrative, as significant support and resource to enable PE to not just exist but progress

• If CSF Funding does not continue into a third year, the PE Manager will be applying to the University to allocate similar

levels of funding from HEIF and core funding. A strong bid for funding will have to be accurate and demonstrate that

continuing the objectives and delivering successful outputs and outcomes will rely on this funding source

• Other funding streams will have to be sourced and are likely to be on a reoccurring application basis. This will be a

challenging time for the PE Unit, if they are to operate as successfully as they intend to

University of Cambridge

Creating sustainability for specific CSF initiatives, beyond a funded position being retained, is more straightforward than

ensuring the momentum and ethos behind the CSF as a whole is retained in institutional memory.

50

King’s College London

Considering how activities will scale up is absolutely key (as is an exit strategy for delivering existing proposals should the

service prove unsuccessful/unnecessary). We have hired a dedicated Research Engagement Manager to address this issue,

which requires significant resource and business planning expertise. We are considering developing a framework agreement

in order to work with a small pool of highly-trained PE professionals, artists and creative professionals in order to deliver the

activities we are building into research grants.

University of Oxford – bid for additional funding

All of our bids were either developed jointly (e.g. European Researchers Night) or with significant input and consultation from

the key colleagues across the University which helps to a) continue to build stakeholder engagement/ buy-in to the plans and

b) ensure funds are applied to activities which are also priorities for others across the University.

Useful resources

The NCCPE has produced guidance on how to make a ‘business case’ for PE:

https://www.publicengagement.ac.uk/explore-it/why-it-important/business-case-public-engagement

51

In a nutshell

The success of the CSF projects was dependent on them building strong networks across their institutions. They were all small

teams, seeking to mobilise change among 1000s of people. All sought to work responsively: they knew that their success

depended on being in tune with and aligned to the priorities and motivations of their colleagues. All sought to work through

networks: to find champions, livewires, activists, who could spread the word and mobilise their colleagues.

Many also sought to develop strong, sustained partnerships with external organisations, recognising the significant value they

could bring in terms of expertise in engagement, and also potentially to provide ‘platforms’ for researchers.

Oxford was typical of the CSF projects: the team undertook a 10-month consultation and stakeholder engagement process,

leading to the University’s first PE with Research Strategic Plan being signed off by the University’s Research Committee.

University of Glasgow

The University of Glasgow’s Catalyst Seed Fund project has centred on listening, learning and implementation with each

initiative designed around the needs and wishes of the research community. The yearlong program of events, projects and

planning have led to a visible increase in the support for, and value placed on, engagement at Glasgow. Each aspect of the

project is formed in consultation with the research community and each new initiative evaluated in terms of its form and

function to ensure our provision remains relevant and fit for purpose.

The best quality PE is designed, tailored and improved upon by listening to the public; so to the best researcher support is

designed, tailored and improved upon by listing to researchers

University of Leeds

We have developed an institutional strategy for PE in a co-productive way that embeds PE more widely and appropriately

includes PE in policies, procedures and practices.

University of Oxford

The need to understand the different cultures and languages of PER across different academic disciplines, the museums and

collections, Continuing Education and the administration services was essential to have any chance of an inclusive PER

strategy and activity plan, which is, and feels, accessible to all.

Consultation across the whole university and all its constituent parts was essential to understand how each ‘frames’ PER

A collegiate approach together with the academic leadership and direction was key

The need to give enough time to consult widely and in-depth (a 10 month process) while being very clear that the Plan

had to be finalised this academic year

Imperial’s approach involved a series of events over several months:

Imperial College London: A consultative approach

Professor Maggie Dallman, Associate Provost (Academic Partnerships), has been the senior champion for delivering the

strategic framework and delivery plan. Work began with an Away Day in January 2015, involving more than 60 staff and

52

students from across the College, to discuss a range of societal engagement themes, from engaging primary schools to citizen

science.

Following the Away Day, an extensive programme of consultation to identify attitudes, barriers and activities in relation to

outreach and PE was carried out. This culminated in an online staff survey over July and August 2015, which attracted an

extraordinary number of responses. The feedback indicated that staff from across the College attach a high level of

importance to societal engagement, but that more needs to be done in terms of support, recognition and enabling

infrastructure to better embed a culture of societal engagement across our institution.

Based on the outcomes of the consultation exercise, a smaller cross-College strategy group, led by Professor Dallman (the

Societal Engagement Group), prepared a set of definitions and developed an institutional framework comprised of five

imperative themes and four enabling themes. This framework was approved by the Provost’s Board in November 2015

University of Leeds

Co-producing the strategy really helped. The team have lived experience of practicing what they preach and can refer to this

example in conversations with staff, which helps with the authenticity of our message, i.e. to engage with others.

University of Oxford

The process of consultation, discussion and brainstorming is as important as the PER Strategic Plan output, The process led to

relationships were built; developed a shared sense of purpose, language and understanding; and helped towards

demonstrating this was a joint and coordinated activity – not a ‘top-down’/ centralised activity.

The use of an external facilitator (Paul Manners, NCCPE) for the final consultation workshop was really helpful; fresh outside

perspective helping us to focus on the key points and not get bogged down in minutiae.

Engaging the University Research Committee along the way was also important – enabling engagement and buy-in to the

activity – rather than ‘popping up’ at the end of the process for final sign-off.

Just getting ‘out there’ and being present at meetings across the institution can really pay dividends:

University of Liverpool

The regular, embedded presence of the PE Manager within the myriad of groups around the University has raised the visibility

and dialogue about PER.

Glasgow made the building of networks a major focus of their work:

University of Glasgow

Using the EDGE tool it was noted that Glasgow lacked networking opportunities for engaged researchers. We have begun to

establish a sense of community around engagement by bringing groups of researchers together in semi structured ways to

learn, socialise and celebrate engagement. We are working not only to share the success of our researchers (e.g. debrief

celebrations) but also to allow potentially isolated researchers to meet others interested in engagement for peer learning and

collaborative working opportunities. Events have worked particularly well when there have been clear instructions and

53

activities designed to have researchers mix with each other and meet new people opposed to unstructured events, such as a

buffet lunch, where researchers spoke only to familiar faces or avoided mixing.

For Oxford, networks (and ‘cascading’ their work through them) was essential. They simply couldn’t have achieved their goals by

attempting to do all the engagement directly.

University of Oxford

As the University of Oxford is such a large and diverse institution, we have concluded that success will only be achieved by

building capacity for high-quality PER amongst not only the academic and research staff but also the academic support staff –

in particular the network of Research Facilitators (who in turn can each reach tens or hundreds of academics and researchers)

and enabling PER to become part of our ‘core’ research support mechanisms (for example – X5 – the University’s costing

tool). Embedding PER at Oxford will not take place by only aiming to engage with academics and researchers directly.

Encouraging and facilitating the departments to undergo their ‘own’ analyses (as well as performing an Institutional-level

EDGE) resulted in not only each one better understanding their own part of the University (re: PER support) but helped build

‘ownership’ for helping to create a culture in which PER can flourish, helping to cascade PER support throughout and across

the University.

However, Oxford decided against establishing a formal PE network:

University of Oxford

An informal network of approximately 50 to 60 ‘core’ academic and academic-support PER stakeholders has developed and

taken part in a number of CSF activities in 2015-16 (including Pro-VCs; senior academics, P.I.’s and College staff; GLAM

Directors and Staff; Assistant Registrars; PAD Staff; PER Facilitators & Comms Managers).

However –after consultation with colleagues we decided not to set up a formal University-wide network specifically for PER –

for the following reasons:

It was felt that, although there were positives with setting up a network, this would relay the impression that PER was

somehow outside normal working culture and you had to ‘join the club’ to take part. So, the decision was made to

engage with a wide range of support-staff and become embedded in the existing support staff networks (principally

Research & Innovation Support Network and the Communications Network) and academic networks and facilitate an

informal network of PER-active academics and researchers

We aim to explore the creation of the PER Academic Advisory Network in 2016-17: but this will be a core group of about

20 or so PER-academics and senior staff from across the University, to be chaired by the PER Champion

Others have followed suit, and developed a variety of approaches

Imperial College London

We have established structures for leadership to develop and govern strategy, including an Engagement with Research

Steering Group, and formed new networks to share skills and practice, including a regular meeting of PE Practitioners.

University of Warwick

The University’s PE Network of over 250 ‘engaged staff’ has enabled learning and professional development

University of Glasgow

Through raising the profile of engagement at the University and celebrating successful engagement we have worked to

inspire the research community around the purpose of engagement. We have created opportunities for engaged researchers

to meet and share their work. There have been more structured events such as the European Researchers Night debrief event

54

and less formal events such as the Science Communication social. Supplementing these events with social media, it has never

been easier for researchers at Glasgow to connect with each other around engagement topics.

Southampton developed a successful new format to bring people together – with a competitive edge! ‘University Challenged’

proved to be ‘a really effective vehicle for cross-University connectivity’. Liverpool developed a PE Forum which worked well:

University of Liverpool

The PER forum is a simple idea and is easy to facilitate, however has proven to be extremely effective. The networking space

is a hugely important component – it is where the instrumental and honest discussions take place. Feedback has shown that

the forum is in-demand; for the forthcoming project year, six PER forum events will take place.

University of Birmingham: Build networks and ‘think local’

Challenges exist in reaching all those interested in PER in large and complex institutions, but tapping into local processes and

networks via our Learning to Engage cohort and the College Directors of Research has helped us to target messages and track

grassroots activity better.

University of Oxford

• The importance of an inclusive, consultative approach, together with an Academic Champion for PER, to provide

leadership and direction, worked well for us at Oxford

• The need for a variety of ‘entry-points’ and ways for research staff and students and support staff to become engaged is

key. While the Strategic Plan is a motivator for some, others are encouraged by the opportunity to get involved in

practical activities or training; or stimulated by the possibility of a VC PER Award, new funding or a REF impact case study

University of Liverpool: working inclusively

• Everybody within the University has an important contribution to make; including Professional Services, and Facilities

Management. Involving the full spectrum of colleagues has been an essential, guiding principle throughout

• Informal, face-to-face meetings have demonstrated an un-surpassed capacity for capturing rich, “real” information about

baseline PER. Similarly, networking space in competitively informal settings have been hugely beneficial – these are

where the instrumental and honest discussions take place

Imperial College London

Working/steering groups need active leadership and terms of reference to ensure each member understands expectations of

them, in order to ensure productivity between meetings.

King’s College London

• We built up our research over time by visiting different members of staff. However, they often provided contradictory

advice. To avoid this we would advise starting off with a larger scale meeting bringing together a range of people in one

place

• We have managed to maintain mutual benefit and shared interest among the PE managers running the Engaged

Researcher network. However, some have been explicitly told by their line managers that this falls outside their

departmental remit and should be seen as additional work to their role. This is a risk of devolving PE support to

55

departments – it can be difficult to convince people to work together on university wide initiatives that promote a shared

vision and have a wider impact (which can also then benefit specific departments involved)

Many projects also sought to develop strong, sustained partnerships with external organisations, recognising the significant

value they could bring in terms of expertise in engagement, and also potentially to provide ‘platforms’ for researchers.

University of Cambridge

Take the opportunity to work in partnership, be that internally with PE professionals across other offices, departments and

faculties, or with external stakeholder including funders, platforms (e.g. museums) and other HEIs. Partnerships will allow you

exploit a myriad of overlapping agendas and multiply your efforts.

University of Liverpool

There is a wealth of potential research partners within the community – often these organisations are small, and aren’t on

the University radar in the same way that larger establishments might be. Therefore, when change agents adopt an overly

focused and strategic approach to brokering partnerships, some of the richness of opportunities might be missed. Rather,

change agents should approach opportunities with an open mind, and not too-strict an agenda, and be prepared to allow for

serendipity; positive, unforeseen outcomes can be delivered.

University of Southampton

The Researchers Cafe format (a part of the Spectrum) looks like the best model to develop a general, sustainable level of

community-researcher interaction. We are exploring how this can interact with a themed engagement hub, initially in the

‘nature and biodiversity’ area.

University of Birmingham

The PER Officer will work with procurement to take forward a discussion around a fit-for-purpose payment approach for

freelancers/individuals/patients as currently payment can only be made post-delivery which is problematic for many of these

groups. Cultural Engagement will be consulted as part of this process.

Imperial College London

A community advisory group is being established to engage local residents in the design and operation.

King’s College London

Not all researchers feel confident when reaching out to or communicating with partner organisations – we have had to

provide a lot of support in this area. In the future we aim to give the researcher more ownership of this part of the process,

potentially by developing discussion prompts to help them during these meetings.

Useful resources

The NCCPE has produced guidance on partnership working:

https://www.publicengagement.ac.uk/do-it/working-partnership

56

In a nutshell

Managing culture change projects requires a very special set of skills and attributes. The success of the CSF teams was built

upon the tenacity, resilience and expertise of their staff.

The CSFs found the role of project manager critically important to their success. Their staff came from a variety of roles, inside

and outside HE. The chance to meet regularly, with the NCCPE, helped the CSF staff to support each other and share lessons

learned about how to lead projects of this complex nature.

Imperial College London

The appointment of the CSF-funded PE Manager has enabled the facilitation of constructive dialogue between stakeholders,

to draw out their strengths and aspirations, make fruitful connections across departments and provide additional resource to

move strategy forward and become an even more engaged university.

Vicky Brightman, started on 2 November 2015 and has become an integral part of the Societal Engagement Group. She was

previously Head of Content and Interpretation at Kew Gardens, with past positions including Head of Learning and

Volunteering at the Horniman Museum and Gardens in London and Acting Head of Learning Programmes at Thinktank,

Birmingham’s Science Museum.

University of Warwick

The biggest and most influential change has been the leadership of the PE Manager and the establishment of the PE Unit,

which, could not have been achieved without the Catalyst Seed Fund, and the support of the RCUK and NCCPE over the last

18 months.

The appointment of the PE Manager in Year One has meant designated resource and support for PE is beginning to be

recognised across the University. The PE Manager has been an active advocate for PE and is a key Informer and influencer in

the departments and schools.

The CSF teams benefited from the experiences of colleagues who were responsible for the Beacon and Catalyst projects, with

whom they met regularly. The NCCPE’s report on the learning from the Catalyst projects identified just how significant the role

of the teams were, and the individuals within them:

Catalyst projects

‘You can’t ever over-estimate the importance of having a good team’ (Catalyst PI)

‘Pick a team leader with passion and ability to withstand the knocks’ (Catalyst PI).

Our interviews made it clear that delivering culture change projects requires very special characteristics within the team,

including the PI. These included expertise in engagement, academic credibility, resilience, ability to engage across a range of

people across the institution, confidence, humility, generosity and an understanding of culture change, including when to

push and when to hold back.

All of the teams noted the importance of flexibility and responding to opportunity and serendipity. The Catalyst teams often

thought of themselves as pollinators – working across institutional silos – mobilising ideas and contacts from different places

within the institution. ‘We carry stories across the institution – sharing the amazing stuff people are doing’.

57

The Catalyst teams identified the vital importance of enthusiasm for engagement – to mobilise change you need to be

convincing and passionate advocate for it:

Passion and enthusiasm – learning from the Catalysts

‘I just came from a meeting about restructuring our department and everyone said that the things that we want to see from

this is that we’re helping to do things that matter, and that it’s fun and interesting to be part of. Because you don’t want to be

people that just push paper around.’

Catalyst funding offered an opportunity to capitalise on the existing and varied PER activity within the host institutions. It

enabled teams to draw out excellent work, and engage with it in meaningful ways. This built on people’s interests and

passions, ensuring that the work of the Catalyst was seen as an opportunity rather than a burden. Teams suggested that this

was really important - building on others’ enthusiasm and not being too quick to nip ideas in the bud. This was particularly

important given the ‘initiative fatigue’ inherent in many universities – where PER could be viewed as ’just another new thing’

staff had to do. One key way of tapping into enthusiasm and passion was to offer opportunities for those really motivated by

this agenda to get involved as champions.

Arising from the Catalyst project, work is currently underway to distil the competencies needed to act as a ‘change agent’. Led

by Ed Stevens from the University of Bath, this work has identified four overarching change agency roles under which change

activities could be classified:

• Catalyst – precipitating strategic change

• Facilitating solutions

• Facilitating processes

• Brokerage

The table below identifies some of the key knowledge and competencies required to play these different roles. These may help

you to both recruit staff, and to communicate to colleagues the kinds of expertise required to facilitate culture change projects.

FOUR CHANGE AGENCY ROLES

CATALYST: Precipitating strategic change at a variety of levels (team / department / organisational / cross-organisational). Influencing, leading, and managing a range of activities that aim to deliver change:

1. PER-related knowledge:

• Knowledge of the diverse, cross-disciplinary approaches to engaged research

• Knowledge of HEFCE’s and the Research Councils’ PE with research agendas

• Awareness of the wider UK HE landscape and how it might impact upon the PER agenda

2. Ability to influence senior managers

3. Inspiring others – mobilising advocates from across multiple audiences

4. Horizon scanning – exploring novel and unexpected issues as well as persistent problems or trends

5. Agenda setting – influencing change topics and activities

FACILITATING SOLUTIONS: Providing solutions to PER issues or supporting individuals to facilitate their own solutions

1. PER-related knowledge:

• Knowledge of a diversity of non-academic publics

• Knowledge of diverse research methods

• Awareness of (organisational) constraints that research and researchers operate under

• Awareness of the wider UK HE landscape and how it might impact upon the PE with research agenda

2. Active listening – ensuring your response is tailored to the other

58

3. Research – sourcing solutions and contacts

4. Ideas generation – providing options for ways forward

5. Expertise – drawing on personal / professional experiences to facilitate solutions

FACILITATING PROCESSES: Working in ways and delivering change activities that help to fulfil your strategic vision –practically catalysing the change

1. PER-related knowledge:

• Understanding the drivers for external publics to engage

• Understanding the drivers for researchers to engage

• Knowledge of local, national, and international opportunities for engagement

• Knowledge of diverse research methods

• Awareness of HE functions and processes

• Expertise in engaged research activities

2. Internal and external communication skills – including marketing that supports a culture of change

3. Facilitation skills – nurturing discussions, spaces, and activities in the support of change

4. Training – devising and delivering relevant professional development opportunities

5. Teamwork – supporting a variety of different teams to achieve the change with the ability to move seamlessly

between them

BROKERAGE: Sharing knowledge and resources both within and without your organisation

1. PER-related knowledge:

• Knowledge of how to build effective research collaborations

• Knowledge of a diversity of non-academic publics

• Understanding the drivers for non-academic publics to engage

• Understanding the drivers for researchers to engage

2. Networking – making contacts with the (right) people

3. Communication skills – specifically, the ability to have multiple conversations with multiple actors

4. Information gathering – building contacts and resources to support the change

5. Being a node on a network – acting as a connection point to your organisation

Stevens, E (2015) Change Agency & Public Engagement (unpublished)

A last word to Jamie Gallagher, project manager or the Glasgow CSF project. Jamie identifies some of the rewards he has

enjoyed over the course of the project.

University of Glasgow

As PE Officer and Catalyst Seed Fund Project Manager the past year has been exciting, challenging and rewarding. The CSF

focused the thinking of me and senior management, encouraging us to think carefully and reflectively on our current position

and our ambitions for the future. It also provided much needed resource with allowed us to escalate our existing plans to

create a yearlong series of initiatives.

The most challenging part of the project has been the implementation of so many new projects in such a short space of time.

The creating new content, events, positions and mechanisms and ensuring they are all delivered to time and to a high quality

was extremely challenging but I found the Glasgow environment encouraging and supportive throughout the project.

The two most rewarding aspects of the project have been: the way the research community took so enthusiastically to all the

opportunities offered to them and having, in my opinion, contributed to real change at the University. The seminars have

59

been full, the award process had to be delayed due to high demand, partners flew from Amsterdam to be at the conference

and senior staff have praised events – all these make the hard work worthwhile, knowing that you are contributing to

something that is both useful and appreciated. I was also particularly delighted to see the change in the EDGE tool analysis

from staff over such a short period. Over the year long period there was a dramatic shift towards the Embedding side of the

EDGE tool in researcher’s self-assessment. This shows that the researchers felt they were in a more positive position with

regards to engagement than they were at the start of the funding period.

Useful resources

You can access some of the CSF role profiles here:

KCL: PE Manager

Leeds: PE Officer

Imperial: PE Manager

You can access the NCCPE’s report on the Catalyst project here:

https://www.publicengagement.ac.uk/sites/default/files/publication/nccpe_catalyst_report_may_2016.pdf

60

In a nutshell

Culture change is a complex, unpredictable process. You should be ensuring that feedback and reflection are animating your

work, at every stage of the journey. This report ends with some final reflections from the project teams.

University of Birmingham

Whilst we have made significant progress, the barriers continually identified (lack of time, lack of recognition, lack of

opportunities) continually draw the CSF project team into broader discussions, which are challenging to resolve within the

CSF timeframe and which the CSF team cannot resolve alone. This can be summarized most simply as issues around time,

with recognition and reward intrinsically linked to this concept. With so many competing pressures on academics, lessening

this burden (through practical support on event delivery and evaluation) and incentivising them will be critical to PER thriving

longer term.

University of Liverpool

The project has revealed that PER, as an integrated part of excellent research, brings with it some equality challenges for

researchers – for instance, a researcher’s personal life situation may impact on their capacity to deliver the best PER, and

thence to deliver the best research. These issues are understood to be sector-wide.

University of Warwick

Cultural change is, at best, slow; it could take a generation (the generation proposed in this context is the time from

completing a PhD to becoming a Professor - ~20 years) and requires continuous pressure across many points. We feel that

with the PE Unit in place we are in a good place to begin to influence the culture at these points.

Imperial College London

Be prepared to re-think your plans. For instance, although internal consultation prioritised delivering a ‘permanent’

engagement with research offer at South Kensington, it did not reveal the best cause of action to accommodate it, so it was

decided to invest more time and resources into small pilot programmes to underpin a fuller feasibility study. This led to a new

focus: designing a ‘programme’ that would work across campuses.

University of Oxford

Timing is key. For example - there was considerable and evident good-will for a University PER Strategic Plan at the early

stages of development, hence the success in making this happen in a devolved University in which such institutional

strategies are not that common. However, the time for opening up discussions regarding changes to job descriptions and

promotions criteria was not right at Oxford. Continually pursuing this agenda in 2015-16 would have likely resulted in little, if

any progress – we will pursue this pathway but when the timing is more appropriate.

King’s College London

It is important to manage expectations around time commitment. Some researchers were surprised at how much time

engagement took to develop and deliver.

61

University of Leeds

We funded the Cohesion project exploring dental health among young people, which went on to win at the NCCPE’s awards.

It was slightly risky to fund this project, but it has delivered. Sometimes risks can offer greater reward.

University of Southampton

Our advice to other HEIs includes:

Find, create and exploit mechanisms (research support, finance) to develop consistent use of Pathways to Impact and

similar

Look for enabling HR structures

Aim to devote substantial effort towards raising awareness at middle-management/group leader level, especially if you

have grass roots and top-level activity in place

Celebrate what’s already happening

Maximise connections with other ‘engagement’ teams, e.g. outreach, business

University of Cambridge

It is important to embrace unforeseen opportunities such as our University review of PE, and ensure that CSF core objectives

are woven in effectively.

University of Birmingham

Stay focused! We identified the need to establish greater clarity around the remit of the role to ensure our PE with Research

Committee members and academics understand the role is focused on culture change rather than event delivery.

62

University of

Birmingham

Our project has a three distinct areas of focus:

1. Linking PER into the work of our senior management: tied to our new strategic framework

which identifies highlighting ‘Influence: Engagement for Impact’ as one of four major goals.

2. Internal Governance and Staffing: establishing a new senior governance body, the PE with

research committee.

3. Embedding PER skills by reviewing and refreshing training and development opportunities,

as well as mentoring and peer support.

https://thinkpe.wordpress.com/

University of Cambridge Our approach to culture change at the University of Cambridge has come from two principal

observation and assessments.

1. The first was the lack of an overarching senior-level strategic framework at the University

to guide PE provision and embed it alongside research and impact agendas. Strengthening

senior academic oversight of PER has been the backbone for the work of our CSF.

2. The second came from a more detailed self-assessment of the specific areas we could target

to facilitate swifter culture change, carried out with the NCCPE EDGE tool. Our assessment

highlighted room for improvement in the areas of ‘Recognition’ and some of the ‘People’

dimensions, which were classified as “Developing”. Our focus in response to this has

therefore been on identifying best practice in PER, rewarding excellence, and extending the

opportunities for more researchers to develop their own PER activity.

https://www.cam.ac.uk/public-engagement

University of Glasgow The Catalyst Seed Fund at Glasgow was targeted to foster change in three main areas.

1. Improve strategic focus and high-level support

To embed ‘leadership’ at the head of our academic structures with the creation of a new

academic lead for PE, active involvement from the Vice Principal and a strong voice created

by a Strategy Group.

2. Raise reward and recognition for engaged researchers

To ‘inspire’ staff and students about the purpose, value and meaning of PE; through

showcasing creative PE projects and celebrating role models, raising awareness of the

personal and professional rewards to be gained through involvement in PE.

3. Improve understanding and grow capacity of PE

To ‘develop’ staff and students ability for high quality PE through a series of planned

initiatives. To give staff and students the best quality resources and training and increase the

quantity and visibility of the support offered.

http://www.gla.ac.uk/services/publicengagement/

Imperial College London The distinctiveness of Imperial’s approach to the CSF has been to position PE with research

within a broader institutional project to develop a Societal Engagement (SE) Framework. This is

an integrated approach across four main types of SE (Engagement with Research, Patient

Engagement, Local Community Engagement and Schools Outreach and Widening Participation).

63

The SE Framework has been developed to realise our strategic commitment to ‘sharing the

wonder and importance of what we do’ with a broad public audience, and to acknowledge the

relationship of these activities as part of a broader pattern of stakeholder engagement across the

institution.

https://www.imperial.ac.uk/about/leadership-and-strategy/provost/academic-

partnerships/societal-engagement/

King’s College London From the very start of the award it was clear that we couldn't follow the same approach as many

of the other CSFs. We had no central PE department at King’s and no remit to develop an

overarching PE strategy and vision which could be implemented from the top down. The few PE

support staff that did exist were working in silos, in individual departments. The approach to

engagement was fragmented, with no clear forward movement or spear head.

It was clear we didn’t have the resources or remit to launch a whole new range of initiatives, or

impose our own top-down strategy and vision for PE at King’s. We needed to fit in with what was

already there, and harness those opportunities to maximise their impact on driving a PE culture

change at King’s.

So, instead of a story about orchestrating a university-wide strategy or programme of activities,

ours is a story about initiating a grassroots movement - embedding PE from the bottom-up. This

will, in the end, be integrated in the research management processes of the university.

http://www.kcl.ac.uk/aboutkings/orgstructure/ps/estates/Real-Estate-

Development/current/ScienceGalleryplanning.aspx

University of Leeds

Our newly co-developed vision for PE with research is that PE is part of impactful research and

something that we do; it is not a separate activity. Therefore PE is integrated into the research

cycle and can occur at all stages of the research cycle. We embrace PE because it is our social

responsibility, we want to increase the trust in our research with the community, we are

accountable to the public as the funders of our research and we want to increase our research’

relevance making it more impactful.

Our strategic plan for PE identifies the following deliverables:

1. The quality and success rate of our proposals through earlier engagement with the public in

the co-design of proposals is improved.

2. The funding for PE within awarded research grants is increased by an average of 2% of the

value of the grants, leading to an overall increase of £4m by 2020.

3. The proportion of impact case studies submitted to the next REF that include impact through

PE is raised to the sector average in REF2014 of 45% (Leeds was 38%);

4. The profile of the University with the public is raised with through targeted activities that are

integrated into our broader communications.

5. Our relationship with local and regional communities is strengthened.

http://comms.leeds.ac.uk/public-engagement/

University of Liverpool

The key, top-level activities cited within the University’s new strategy for PE are:

1. The University will reach out to establish and nurture partnerships with a diverse range of

external organisations, within the community, health, educational, cultural, business,

government and NGO sectors.

64

2. The University will develop an environment in which engagement is embedded into research

& teaching

3. The University will commit to ensuring that it offers an unrivalled programme of quality

engagement for the next generation of researchers from all backgrounds, and their

influencers.

4. The University will commit to actively involve and listen to a variety of key, public

stakeholders in the longitudinal development of our PE plan.

5. The University will commit to a “living” delivery plan; which will be flexible enough to evolve

in order to maximise the impact and public benefit it delivers.

The University currently has an intranet for PER which is being developed in consultation with

colleagues. The next step will be something more external facing – work is in progress.

University of Oxford

The Catalyst Seed Fund award comes at a very opportune time for Oxford as the University takes

steps to enhance institutional support in PE. PE with Research is one of the key priorities in the

University’s Strategic Plan. Our longer term aim is to embed PER in our thinking and action as an

institution; empowering and supporting researchers across the career spectrum to engage the

public in creative, inspiring ways that benefit research and the community.

We are looking at what PE means at Oxford in the context of different disciplinary traditions and

forms of knowledge and using this to develop our first PER Strategy. With a focus on increasing

quality rather than simply quantity, we will celebrate excellent PE and foster a vibrant

interdisciplinary network that embraces best practice and encourages an increase in partnership

working.

Sharing learning will be at the heart of our journey, listening to others and communicating our

successes and challenges with both national and international PE and academic communities.

We will maximise opportunities for increased coordination and collaboration and build upon our

strengths to better effect, including our museums and collections, digital platforms and

education programmes.

http://www.ox.ac.uk/research/public-engagement

University of

Southampton

The Southampton project emphasises enabling PE capacity over delivering PE activities. Within

that overall strategy, we are committed to expanding and developing a small number of high-

quality platforms around existing national frameworks (Being Human, British Science Week,

ESRC Festival of Social Science). These provide accessible models for engagement and we will

have an opportunity to integrate these platforms with major city/University infrastructure

developments.

The Southampton project has paid attention to the learning from the Beacons and Catalysts,

especially with regard to our approach to festivals. The overall culture change effort aims to

maximise effect by aligning with key institutional partners in Research and Innovation Services, in

PublicPolicy@Southampton, in the new Doctoral College, in the Talk to US SUPI (best practice for

schools/researcher interaction) and in the Students Union.

http://www.southampton.ac.uk/per

University of Warwick

A potentially distinctive part of the Warwick CSF is the coupling of efforts to more deeply embed

both PE and Impact into the research culture across the institution; both aspects are at similar

stages in their respective ‘journeys’. Additionally, impact and PE can be very closely related,

particularly in some subjects within the arts and humanities and also in medical research that

65

involves patients where PE is an integral part of the research method. An example of the

synergies between impact and PE through the work of the Impact Officers has been to re-visit the

opportunities for developing REF case studies involving PE.

http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/about/community/publicengagement/